From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: Merge headerfiles for m68k and m68knommu to arch/m68k/include/asm Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 19:04:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20081209180405.GA5890@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <20081208205814.GA22697@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20081209054528.GA1407@uranus.ravnborg.org> <200812091202.47150.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.236]:48805 "EHLO pfepb.post.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752976AbYLISCh (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2008 13:02:37 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200812091202.47150.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Roman Zippel , linux-m68k , Greg Ungerer , uclinux-dev , linux-kbuild On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 12:02:46PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 09 December 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > What are the other exported headers that differ? > > byteorder.h, param.h, ptrace.h, setup.h, sigcontext.h, siginfo.h, signal.h > and unistd.h. And diffing these files for the most part it looked like a simple job for someone with some basic m68k/m68knommu knowledge to unify these. That would be a natural next step when the headers are unified. I do not see it as a prerequisite for the merge of the header files. Sam