On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 01:41:00PM +0800, Paul Goyette wrote:
> Is there a good reason to continue to include wapbl.h in the lfs source
> files? As far as I can see, nothing in lfs uses any of the macros or
> structs that are defined in wapbl.h; other than the #include lines, the
> only refere
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 13:41:00 +0800 (PHT)
From: Paul Goyette
Is there a good reason to continue to include wapbl.h in the lfs source
files? As far as I can see, nothing in lfs uses any of the macros or
structs that are defined in wapbl.h; other than the #include lines, the
on
Is there a good reason to continue to include wapbl.h in the lfs source
files? As far as I can see, nothing in lfs uses any of the macros or
structs that are defined in wapbl.h; other than the #include lines, the
only references to either wapbl or WAPBL in the lfs sources is in some
error-exit la
