From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 17 Mar 02 12:10:43 PST From: msokolov@ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov) Message-Id: <0203172010.AA01807@ivan.Harhan.ORG> To: linux-galileo@source.mvista.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] My GT-64260 enhancements Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Dan Malek wrote: > So, I don't see the problem. A default is specified and you can change it, > just like lots of other configurations. The problem is that there is a define_int CONFIG_SERIAL_CONSOLE_BAUD 115200 line in arch/ppc/config.in for "$CONFIG_EV64260" = "y" but not for any other almost-non-embedded-standard-computer 6xx/7xx/74xx board, which is discriminatory and undemocratic. Having "$CONFIG_GT64260" = "y" imply support for CONFIG_SERIAL_TEXT_DEBUG is also discriminatory and undemocratic. Should we also imply the same then for "$CONFIG_CPC700" = "y" -o "$CONFIG_CPC710" = "y" -o "$CONFIG_UNINORTH" = "y", etc? I mean I don't mind if defaults are changed globally, it's just the discriminatory treatment of GT-64260 that I violently object to. Oh, and having a separate BK tree and mailing list for it too isn't something I'm fond of. MS ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/