On Tue, 20 May 2003 10:08:46 +1000, Rusty Russell said:
> In message <20030519111028.B8663@infradead.org> you write:
> > Urgg, yet another sys_futex extension.  Could you please split all
> > these totally different cases into separate syscalls instead?
> 
> I don't mind either way, but wouldn't that be pointless incompatible
> churn?

Doesn't matter, the churn hasn't been reflected in glibc-kernheaders yet
either way.  Once kernheaders gets updated to match, you're stuck with whatever
it is at that point, so churn now while you have a chance. ;)

(Sorry, I couldn't resist)
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]