![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 03:58:10 -0500, Jeff Garzik <garzik@havoc.gtf.org> wrote: >On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 06:52:55PM +1100, Keith Owens wrote: >You are missing a huge point. > You: "Look Ma, nothing breaks!" > Ma sez: "It's supposed to, silly" Hypocrisy, Jeff. In your previous mail you complained that kbuild 2.5 was not ready to go in. When I point out that not only is it ready but it can go in without breaking the existing code, then you complain that I am not breaking anything. Make up your mind. >Cleanup does not occur if cruft lives on as "backwards compatibility." >You simply promote further bitrot and discontinuity. The old code does not live on indefinitely, it gets removed as soon as kbuild 2.5 is deemed stable. Four weeks, tops. >Let's see if I have this right: >* You want completely duplicate build and config systems in the kernel, > with all the accompanying headaches for maintainers. Only for as long as it takes to prove that kbuild 2.5 is ready. >* You want to introduce a new system but don't give a shit about 2.5. I have given up trying to get patches into 2.5. The Linus black hole swallows them all. - 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 11:16 [W:0.388 / U:0.040 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | ||||||||||