From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com (e32.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.150])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "e32.co.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK))
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE670DDE1C
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:45:15 +1000 (EST)
Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com
	[9.17.195.227])
	by e32.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.8) with ESMTP id
	l3JLgSva024061
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:42:28 -0400
Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (d03av01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.167])
	by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.3) with ESMTP id
	l3JLjBoT159470
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 15:45:11 -0600
Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])
	by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id
	l3JLjBsl022296
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 15:45:11 -0600
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] Change 440GP platform to ppc440
From: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704191615040.25069@localhost.localdomain>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704191615040.25069@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 16:43:26 -0500
Message-Id: <1177019006.3877.36.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 16:16 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> I don't see any reason the 440GP should its own platform.  Posting this to
> see if anyone thinks otherwise.

Seems fine to me.

josh