From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sgi.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfs: Makefile-linux-2.6 => Makefile?
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 15:03:57 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43C2CFBD.8040901@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060109164611.GA1382@infradead.org>
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 05:42:14PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>
>>Hi hch.
>>
>>Any specific reason why xfs uses a indirection for the Makefile?
>>It is planned to drop export of VERSION, PATCHLEVEL etc. from
>>main makefile and it is OK except for xfs due to the funny
>>Makefile indirection.
>>
>>I suggest:
>>git mv fs/xfs/Makefile-linux-2.6 fs/xfs/Makefile
>
>
> I'd be all for it, but the SGI people like this layout to keep a common
> fs/xfs for both 2.4 and 2.6 (with linux-2.4 and linux-2.6 subdirs respectively)
>
> p.s. and no, I'm not official xfs maintainer and never have been, so cc set
> to linux-xfs were all interested parties hang around.
>
Yep, our internal tree has both linux-2.4/ and linux-2.6/ subdirs, so this is
handy internal to sgi. But I don't have a big problem with the kernel.org code
losing the indirection, even if we keep it here. I'd check with Nathan first
though, because he'd have to work around that difference when he pushes code out.
Out of curiosity, what's the reason to drop VERSION & PATCHLEVEL... seems handy
if you have a common body of code that needs to build for various kernels, with
various Makefiles to suit. As above. :)
Thanks,
-Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-09 21:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-09 16:42 xfs: Makefile-linux-2.6 => Makefile? Sam Ravnborg
2006-01-09 16:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-01-09 17:19 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-01-09 21:01 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-01-09 21:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-01-09 21:18 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-01-09 21:03 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2006-01-09 21:20 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-01-09 21:23 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-01-09 21:45 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-01-10 7:45 ` Andrew Morton
2006-01-10 15:14 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-01-10 16:34 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-01-10 20:02 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-01-16 23:19 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-01-17 3:40 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-01-10 20:00 ` Sam Ravnborg
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=43C2CFBD.8040901@sgi.com \
--to=sandeen@sgi.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.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