From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Ungerer Subject: Re: m68k/for-2.6.34 Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 21:08:55 +1000 Message-ID: <4B6D4DC7.7050802@snapgear.com> References: <10f740e81002011212t91a087bkeb77dac23f5676e0@mail.gmail.com> <4B6B33EC.9000102@codesourcery.com> <10f740e81002060144l7850f81ftd516600c27a33c7c@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: uClinux development list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <10f740e81002060144l7850f81ftd516600c27a33c7c@mail.gmail.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: uclinux-dev-bounces@uclinux.org Errors-To: uclinux-dev-bounces@uclinux.org To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Linux/m68k , uClinux development list , Greg Ungerer List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org On 02/06/2010 07:44 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 21:54, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >> On 2/1/10 11:12 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> ... >>> >>> Should I add the NPTL support for m68k and m68knommu, or shall I wait >>> for 2.6.35? >> >> Notwithstanding the bias, I think you should merge the NPTL support. The >> NPTL changes don't touch any of the existing functionality, they only add >> the new syscalls, so the risk of breaking something is negligible. > > OK for me. Greg, OK for m68knommu, too? Yep, good for m68knommu too. Regards Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: gerg@snapgear.com SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888 8 Gardner Close, FAX: +61 7 3891 3630 Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com _______________________________________________ uClinux-dev mailing list uClinux-dev@uclinux.org http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org To unsubscribe see: http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev