Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Feb 2000 13:40:26 -0500 (EST) | From | "Richard B. Johnson" <> | Subject | Re: 'core' (patch) |
| |
On Fri, 11 Feb 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I think it would be "nice" to change the kernel directory name, > > presently "core", to "Core". There are various reasons for doing > > That is inconsistent with naming of all other directories and also breaks > patches and expectations from before. >
Huh? The changed tree compiles. A patch for 2.3.n+1 seldom works for 2.3.n-1 anyway.
> > I made was that when the kernel subdirectory is mounted across the > > network, and accessed by a Sun Workstation, the "core" directory > > is lit up like a big red bomb! Harmless, but not necessary. > > Please report a bug to the maker of the software in question. They should be > checking for files and using magic number checks. > > Perhaps we should use 8.3 filenames too just in case someone wants to build > on a DOS fs
No. I want to build this on a Teletype with 5-level Bardot code and paper tape.
Cheers, Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.3.41 on an i686 machine (800.63 BogoMips).
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |