![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Em Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 03:44:10PM +1100, Keith Owens escreveu: > On Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:21:39 -0800, > Mike Castle <dalgoda@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 10:58:03PM -0500, Legacy Fishtank wrote: > >> s/break/update dependencies/ > >> > >> I assumed this was blindingly obvious, but I guess not. > > > >To YOU and other kernel hackers, yes. > > > >But not to everyone. > > > >Plus, as I understand it, it will be faster to: > > > >apply a patch and rebuild with kbuild 2.5 > > > >than to: > > > >apply a patch, make dep && make bzImage. > > > >Correct? > > As long as the patch does not change an include file that is used a > lot, yes, a patch and make will be significantly faster using kbuild And thats something I encourage people to work on: to reduce the includes dependencies hell, I hope to have the cleanup I did to include/net/sock.h removing the protocol specific headers from there and the cleanup that Daniel Phillips is doing in include/net/fs.h in the tree soon, of course if there's not issues, that we're very interesting to know. - Arnaldo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:14 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||