[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131218113651.GQ3694@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 12:36:51 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Linux-Next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ffusco@...hat.com,
dborkman@...hat.com, tgraf@...hat.com,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the net-next tree
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:33:24PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:07:34AM -0000, David Laight wrote:
> > > > And sort(1) is annoying in that it doesn't do in-place sort; you'll end
> > > > up with empty files if you try the naive thing.
> > > >
> > > > Worse most of those Kbuild files include other random garbage, which
> > > > makes automated sorting harder still.
> > > >
> > > > So unless there's a sane and easy way to keep it sorted; I'm going to
> > > > ignore that rule.
> > >
> > > Not keeping them sorted causes merge conflicts and duplicate/missing
> > > entries.
>
> Surely sorting doesn't cure missing entries. Also sorting can at most
> reduce merge conflicts, not take them out entirely.
In fact, manually editing these files carries a far greater risk of
causing missing entries than sorting could possibly cure.
Also, missing entires isn't much of a problem to begin with, compilers
are rather good at finding the problem.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists