Andre Hedrick wrote:
>
> Make it and I will care and post it on kernel.org for you.
> I need that patch soon.
>
> On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Tom Leete wrote:
>
> > Alan Cox wrote:
> > > The string.h code was fine, someone came along and put in a ridiculous loop
> > > in the include dependancies and broke it. Nobody has had the time to untangle
> > > it cleanly since
> >
> > Yes, bitrot. I don't see a rearrangement of system headers happening in 2.4.
> > I'm pretty sure if I committed such a patch it would have no measurable
> > lifetime.
Hi Andre,
I meant that nobody should be reshuffling 2.4 headers now, didn't intend to
sound like I take that personally.
I'll take a look. I may be able to do something with include guards or other
#defines + multiple passes. We already have the multiple passes.
I think my arguments for the present patch are good. I'm making a mod of
Arjan's athlon.c to see if I'm right. If you have a suggestion for another
benchmark, I'd like to hear about it. Whatever the results, I'll post them
here.
Glad if whatever comes out is useful to you.
Cheers,
Tom
-- The Daemons lurk and are dumb. -- Emerson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 07 2001 - 21:00:12 EST