On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 11:35:10AM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > b) I'd rather have __arch_um__ mentioned explicitly in 3 places where
> > we do care about difference between i386 and uml/i386 than have certain
> > to be forgotten rules for places like include/asm-x86
> >
> > c) if you look at th
Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 09:01:52PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
>
>> Thats nice, I wonder why I missed them searching on lkml in my gmail box
>> :(
>>
>> Is __arch_um__ the right thing to do or BITS_PER_LONG == 32? I prefer
>> BITS_PER_LONG == 32 over #if defined(__i386__) || define
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 09:01:52PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> Thats nice, I wonder why I missed them searching on lkml in my gmail box
> :(
>
> Is __arch_um__ the right thing to do or BITS_PER_LONG == 32? I prefer
> BITS_PER_LONG == 32 over #if defined(__i386__) || defined(__arch__um__).
> I gu
Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 06:30:22PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
>> Fix build errors seen in UML.
>
> Al fixed these already.
>
> FWIW, below is a rolled-up combo patch which make 2.6.24-rc1 UML build.
>
> It includes Al's build fixes, Wang Cong's driver fix, and a declaration
>
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 06:30:22PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> Fix build errors seen in UML.
Al fixed these already.
FWIW, below is a rolled-up combo patch which make 2.6.24-rc1 UML build.
It includes Al's build fixes, Wang Cong's driver fix, and a declaration
mismatch in sched.c.
5 matches
Mail list logo