From: kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen)
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: If you want kbuild 2.5, tell Linus
Date: 06 Jun 2002 21:31:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8QMRXthXw-B@khms.westfalen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E17Esc6-0000v9-00@starship>
phillips@bonn-fries.net (Daniel Phillips) wrote on 03.06.02 in <E17Esc6-0000v9-00@starship>:
> Linus has already indicated his position, I guess you were busy writing
> the post so you didn't notice:
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=102304528224527&w=2
>
> Plus you've got helpers, how could the situation be better?
I fail to see how this is supposed to work, and I guess so does Keith.
Kai (a different Kai!) does not seem to want to integrate the core part of
kbuild2.5. He seems to want to only pick the low-hanging fruits and make
unsupported (and unbelievable) noises about the rest.
And Linus seems to want to ignore the fact that the core portion of
kbuild2.5 is, by its very nature, not something that can be merged
"gradually" - just like ALSA, or a new architecture, can't meaningfully be
merged "gradually". (And he *also* said that he wasn't interested in
pseudo-gradually, i.e. getting the stuff in parts but still making a big
exchange.)
Frankly, I see *absolutely no way* how the current Kai-Linus "merge" can
possibly end with something even remotely like Keith's kbuild2.5. Unless
Linus changes his approach radically.
If I were Keith, I'd be rather upset, too.
MfG Kai
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-06 20:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-03 13:58 If you want kbuild 2.5, tell Linus Keith Owens
2002-06-03 13:20 ` Martin Dalecki
2002-06-03 14:36 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-06-03 14:15 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-03 17:51 ` Austin Gonyou
2002-06-03 22:10 ` Diego Calleja
2002-06-03 22:24 ` John Alvord
2002-06-03 22:34 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-03 23:10 ` Diego Calleja
2002-06-04 1:26 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-06 19:31 ` Kai Henningsen [this message]
2002-06-06 20:56 ` Tom Rini
2002-06-07 0:30 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-07 15:29 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-03 14:33 ` Nicolas Pitre
2002-06-03 15:27 ` Peter Wächtler
2002-06-03 16:09 ` Nicolas Pitre
2002-06-03 14:54 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-06-03 17:26 ` Olivier Galibert
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-06-03 15:29 Wayne.Brown
2002-06-03 16:05 ` Mark Mielke
2002-06-03 17:24 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-03 17:33 Martin.Knoblauch
2002-06-03 17:48 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-04 7:04 Martin.Knoblauch
2002-06-06 21:01 Jesse Pollard
2002-06-06 21:36 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-06-10 21:43 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-07 1:39 ` Mark Mielke
2002-06-07 15:31 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-06-08 15:51 ` David Woodhouse
2002-06-08 15:54 ` Thunder from the hill
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=8QMRXthXw-B@khms.westfalen.de \
--to=kaih@khms.westfalen.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@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