[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Large block device patch, part 1 of 9
On Thursday 05 September 2002 03:31, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 02:38:58AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > The thing is, I don't see why we should be building castles and cathedrals
> > around printk. Just cast to the wider value, if you get it wrong you have
> > lost exactly what? Are people feeding the output of dmesg into scripts
> > that their systems depend upon? If so, we need to let evolution do its
> > work.
> Why do it the broken way when you can do it a non-broken way? Arguing in
> favour of having it broken by design isn't something I really understand.

Because you're only fixing the printk, and with an inadequate solution at
that. Could we please fix something that matters?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.060 / U:2.616 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site