![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 09:14:01PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Al Viro wrote: > > As far as I can see that's the minimally intrusive header changes needed > > to avoid problems - better than variant with splitting sched.h as in m68k CVS. > > We can discuss about that. IIRC, HCH is also in favor of splitting off struct > task_struct from sched.h. Sure, but splitting sched.h is a separate story. Mixing it with m68k merge will only make both harder. It requires more include reordering and I'd rather keep that headache separate from m68k issues. I agree that eventual splitup of sched.h makes sense. However, I think that going for minimally intrusive variant of merge and then dealing with sched.h would be easier for everyone. - 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: 2005-04-26 05:28 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||