[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4813DAD5.50509@zytor.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 18:45:57 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
CC: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>,
tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Voyager phys_cpu_present_map compile error
Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> I'm not claiming it was the end of the world if someone accidentally
> breaks Voyager.
>
> But Ingo wanted me to stop to sometimes compile test Voyager.
>
It would be good if "make randconfig" didn't go down this or other
"secondary" paths.
>> James has offered to fix up Voyager breakage a posteori, and that is the
>> appropriate action for a niche architecture like this.
>
> I'm still not getting the point why we should ever wait for James for
> doing things like
> - select HAVE_ARCH_KGDB
> + select HAVE_ARCH_KGDB if !X86_VOYAGER
>
> And the other compile breakages we had recently weren't much worse.
>
> I fully agree that it makes sense that Voyager problems should not be
> showstoppers and that James is the one capable and responsible of fixing
> non-trivial issues.
That's fine, IMHO, just don't require *other* people to worry about it.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists