From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 08:49:25 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Steven Scholz Cc: LinuxPPC Subject: Re: board specific defines in commproc.h !?!? Message-ID: <20020617154925.GT13541@opus.bloom.county> References: <3D0DA9C2.D78C43E5@imc-berlin.de> <20020617153255.GS13541@opus.bloom.county> <3D0E0253.A6A56B53@imc-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <3D0E0253.A6A56B53@imc-berlin.de> Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 05:37:55PM +0200, Steven Scholz wrote: > Tom Rini wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 11:20:02AM +0200, Steven Scholz wrote: > > > > > Hi there, > > > > > > I think we should move the board specific defines such as > > > > > > /*** RPXCLASSIC *****************************************************/ > > [snip] > > > etc. out of ./include/asm-ppc/commproc.h into the board specific header > > > files like ./arch/ppc/platforms/xxx.h > > > > Yes, we should. Patches vs linuxppc-2.5 (note, you won't be able to > > boot 8xx unless you perform some other updates) happily accepted. > > Ehm... Does that mean you won't accept patches vs linuxppc-2.4 though > !?!? That means I want this to be done in 2.5 first. Where development is supposed to happen. I have this feeling that fixing commproc.h will be more than 1 simple patch and we should do it in the development tree first. Then, once that's all done and people are happy with it, we can move it to linuxppc_2_4. -- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/