Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 26 Feb 2006 23:12:51 +0100 | From | "Jesper Juhl" <> | Subject | Re: Building 100 kernels; we suck at dependencies and drown in warnings |
| |
On 2/26/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote: > On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 22:56 +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > Yeah so gcc is not perfect, but that still doesn't change that the > > intention of the warning and the use of the word "might" is as I said > > above. > > Not a very compelling case for changing the kernel rather than getting > GCC fixed. >
I think we are misunderstanding eachother. Or rather, I seem to have misread what Nix wrote.
I saw "(i.e., there's a reason that warning uses the word *might*.)" and mistakenly read it as a question - "is there a reason that warning uses the word *might*?". I then proceeded to answer that question. When I read your latest mail I then couldn't make sense of things any longer and went back and read the previous mails again and realized my mistake.
My bad, sorry.
-- Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - 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/
| |