[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1107110124420.2818@swampdragon.chaosbits.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 01:26:55 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Should SUBLEVEL be removed for 3.x ?
On Sun, 10 Jul 2011, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 00:07:13 +0200 (CEST) Jesper Juhl wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > If the plan is that the new kernel is going to be 3.0 (3.x) and the
> > -stable kernels then get to tack on a third digit with EXTRAVERSION, then
> > it seems to me that the main Makefile should get rid of SUBLEVEL - or?
> >
> > Or is the plan to ditch EXTRAVERSION for -stable kernels and have them use
> > SUBLEVEL instead?
> >
> > There are a few scripts that need fixing if SUBLEVEL goes the way of the
> > Dodo, but I didn't want to start fixing those without a clear indication
> > of whether or not SUBLEVEL is going to/should die.
> >
> > So what's going to happen to SUBLEVEL/EXTRAVERSION?
>
> I cannot answer this, but I'd certainly like to see a clear answer
> since I also have several scripts that need such attention.
>
And besides our own personal scriots there's also stuff like
scripts/patch-kernel and Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt
that need updating.
--
Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.
--
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