Re: Linux 2.6.12-rc3

Al Viro
2005-04-26T03:24:19Z

On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 09:14:01PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Al Viro wrote:
> > As far as I can see that's the minimally intrusive header changes needed
> > to avoid problems - better than variant with splitting sched.h as in m68k CVS.
>
> We can discuss about that. IIRC, HCH is also in favor of splitting off struct
> task_struct from sched.h.

Sure, but splitting sched.h is a separate story. Mixing it with m68k
merge will only make both harder. It requires more include reordering
and I'd rather keep that headache separate from m68k issues. I agree
that eventual splitup of sched.h makes sense. However, I think that
going for minimally intrusive variant of merge and then dealing with
sched.h would be easier for everyone.