Re: Pondering machvec ... was: [Patch] Remove sn2_defconfig.

[Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:56:07AM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > I don't think I understand your argument.  Are you essentially saying we
> > should consider eliminating the mach_vec stuff entirely?  If so, will
> > we essentially be saying that the distros need to build a seperate kernel
> > for each of tiger, zx1, sn2, and uv?
> 
> No ... exactly the opposite ... I'm wondering whether we should give
> up maintaining/building all the tiger_, zx1_ configs and only have the
> generic one ... since it appears that the number of end users of non-generic
> kernels can be counted on the toes of one foot.

I won't speak to the others, but as for sn2_defconfig SGI appears to
still be a go.  I did get feedback from a couple engineers that had been
using the sn2_defconfig, but both seem to accept the generic_defconfig
as an adequate substitue now that it has our needed disk drivers.


Thanks,
Robin