public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
Cc: davem@redhat.com, geert@linux-m68k.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com,
	linux390@de.ibm.com, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: architectures with their own "config PCMCIA"
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:54:59 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040811165459.GR11200@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040807170122.GM17708@fs.tum.de>

On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 07:01:22PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> The following architetures have their own "config PCMCIA" instead of 
> including drivers/pcmcia/Kconfig (in 2.6.8-rc3-mm1):
> - m68k
> - s390
> - sparc
> - sparc64
> Is there any good reason for this, or would a patch to change these 
> architectures to include drivers/pcmcia/Kconfig be OK?

I'd like to switch things over to drivers/Kconfig and/or
drivers/pcmcia/Kconfig. If the drivers are bust I'll just sweep them
when someone complains about the build being bust. One could
proactively find these with make allmodconfig and/or allyesconfig, but
I suspect that may be too large a set of drivers to digest all at once.
Or maybe not -- akpm does scale, after all.


-- wli

      parent reply	other threads:[~2004-08-11 16:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-07 17:01 architectures with their own "config PCMCIA" Adrian Bunk
2004-08-07 17:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-08-07 17:25   ` Adrian Bunk
2004-08-07 18:12     ` Arnd Bergmann
2004-08-07 20:36       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2004-08-07 21:41         ` Arnd Bergmann
2004-08-11 16:45           ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-08-11 20:17       ` Adrian Bunk
2004-08-11 21:40         ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-08-12  0:10           ` Adrian Bunk
2004-08-12  8:59             ` Roman Zippel
2004-08-14 20:47               ` Adrian Bunk
2004-08-15 17:32                 ` Roman Zippel
2004-08-15 19:37                   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2004-08-15 20:15                     ` Adrian Bunk
2004-08-15 23:01                     ` Roman Zippel
2004-08-15 23:22                       ` Adrian Bunk
2004-08-11 21:45         ` Roman Zippel
2004-08-12  0:18           ` Adrian Bunk
2004-08-12  2:19             ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-08-11 16:54 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20040811165459.GR11200@holomorphy.com \
    --to=wli@holomorphy.com \
    --cc=bunk@fs.tum.de \
    --cc=davem@redhat.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=linux390@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox