From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 04:49:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 04:49:07 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([212.34.181.86]:53522 "EHLO verein.lst.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 04:49:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 10:53:24 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Rusty Russell Cc: marcelo@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] list.h update (resent again) Message-ID: <20020829105324.A13720@lst.de> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Rusty Russell , marcelo@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com References: <20020829021616.A9715@lst.de> <20020829160358.30db26fb.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20020829160358.30db26fb.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>; from rusty@rustcorp.com.au on Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 04:03:58PM +1000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 04:03:58PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > Don't apply it (at least, the first part is bad). > > Linus, here's my patch to get rid of the usurper list_t in 2.5 > (against 2.5.32, so might have some rejects). U don't think that's a valid reason to delay it. Ingo added list_t for a reason und 2.4 is not the right place to change struct list_head to struct list, which sounds good for 2.5.