lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jul]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Cosmetic JFFS patch.
Date
> 
>
> Is this (printing out versions. etc) really a big deal so we should add stuff
> like "/proc/xxx", KERN_XXXX to make things more complicated? It sounds to me
> like to make the kernel "smaller" we'd actually end up with adding more code
> and complexity to it. And quite frankly, if people don't read MAINTAINERS,
> they won't read /proc/maintainers either.

That was why I had the thought of doing it at compile time, based on a
magic list of versions only updated by Linus.
As I've been told that this won't work very well due to some people having
the temerity to disagree with him on driver versions shipped :), something
more flexible is needed.

I can't think of a neat way to do this, without knowing the source
tree the kernel came from though.
I think at least knowing what drivers are not stock might be useful.

Perhaps
make distversion xxx
would add another string to KERNELRELEASE, setting a major releases "stock"
drivers, and letting anything that changes thereafter have a higher
default display level.

-
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 12:55    [W:0.723 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site