From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:48:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms2.broadcom.com ([IPv6:::ffff:63.70.210.59]:49412 "EHLO mms2.broadcom.com") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:48:37 +0000 Received: from 63.70.210.1 by mms2.broadcom.com with ESMTP (Broadcom MMS1 SMTP Relay (MMS v5.5.0)); Thu, 20 Feb 2003 09:45:39 -0700 Received: from mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com (mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com [10.16.128.236]) by mon-irva-11.broadcom.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA06738; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 09:48:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from dt-sj3-158.sj.broadcom.com (dt-sj3-158 [10.21.64.158]) by mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com (8.12.4/8.12.4/SSF) with ESMTP id h1KHmUER017276; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 09:48:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from broadcom.com (IDENT:kwalker@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dt-sj3-158.sj.broadcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA22100; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 09:48:30 -0800 Message-ID: <3E5514EE.C22C82D@broadcom.com> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 09:48:30 -0800 From: "Kip Walker" Organization: Broadcom Corp. BPBU X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.5-beta4va3.20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, "Ralf Baechle" Subject: Re: [patch] Coalesce duplicated SiByte settings References: X-WSS-ID: 124BCBC91421539-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 1471 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: kwalker@broadcom.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips "Maciej W. Rozycki" wrote: > > Hello, > > There is quite a lot identical entries for SiByte board variations in the > top-level architecture Makefiles. They look confusing and I don't think > they are necessary. Following is a proposal to remove duplicated entries. > OK? Mmm, cool. No objection here. I think they'll continue to share the subdirectories/code that they do now. Kip