From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id f6DIHpU23790 for linux-mips-outgoing; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:17:51 -0700 Received: from ocean.lucon.org (c1473286-a.stcla1.sfba.home.com [24.176.137.160]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id f6DIHnV23787; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:17:49 -0700 Received: by ocean.lucon.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AF72F125BA; Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:17:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:17:43 -0700 From: "H . J . Lu" To: Andreas Jaeger Cc: Ulrich Drepper , Ralf Baechle , linux-mips@oss.sgi.com, GNU C Library Subject: Re: Clean up the mips dynamic linker Message-ID: <20010713111743.C25902@lucon.org> References: <20010712182402.A10768@lucon.org> <20010713112635.A32010@bacchus.dhis.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from aj@suse.de on Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 08:07:40PM +0200 Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 08:07:40PM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > Ulrich Drepper writes: > > > Ralf Baechle writes: > > > >> So please, go ahead. > > > > So you say the patch is OK from your POV? > > Just for the record, I also think it's ok - but will not apply it > since it depends on patches for generic code. Please ignore my first patch, which is wrong. The second one is ok which doesn't touch generic code. H.J.