From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S932393AbWBBWm3@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932393AbWBBWm3 (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Thu, 2 Feb 2006 17:42:29 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932388AbWBBWm3
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 2 Feb 2006 17:42:29 -0500
Received: from pasmtp.tele.dk ([193.162.159.95]:53520 "EHLO pasmtp.tele.dk")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932393AbWBBWm2 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 2 Feb 2006 17:42:28 -0500
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 23:42:13 +0100
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>, Michael Loftis <mloftis@wgops.com>,
       David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se>, Doug McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org>,
       Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu,
       dtor_core@ameritech.net, James Courtier-Dutton <James@superbug.co.uk>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Development tree, PLEASE?
Message-ID: <20060202224212.GC8712@mars.ravnborg.org>
References: <5793EB6F192350088E0AC4CE@d216-220-25-20.dynip.modwest.com> <87slrio9wd.fsf@asmodeus.mcnaught.org> <25D702FB62516982999D7084@d216-220-25-20.dynip.modwest.com> <20060202121653.GI20484@vasa.acc.umu.se> <67A0AFFBC77C32B9DEE25EFA@dhcp-2-206.wgops.com> <20060202201008.GD11831@redhat.com> <20060202220519.GA8712@mars.ravnborg.org> <20060202221023.GJ11831@redhat.com> <20060202221922.GB8712@mars.ravnborg.org> <20060202223156.GK11831@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20060202223156.GK11831@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 05:31:56PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 11:19:22PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> 
>  > > -rw-r--r--    1 davej    davej        1753 Dec 15 23:31 linux-2.6-bzimage.patch
>  > > 
>  > > To get around some gynamstics in the rpm spec, defining a seperate build target
>  > > for every arch, we make every arch grok 'bzImage'. Fugly, but it keeps the
>  > > spec cleaner to maintain.
>  > 
>  > Yup - seen it before. Did not like it.
>  > Consistent use of KBUILD_IMAGE across relevant architectures should buy
>  > you the same simplicity and a mergeable approach.
> 
> tbh, patches like this just sit there, as 'they just work', rarely need
> rediffing, the benefit to other people of it being upstream are next to nil
> (or someone else would've done it by now), and I'm more motivated to work on
> real problems like finding out why we've 3 different flavours of slab corruption right now.

Fair enough. I expected you to ask me to do it ;-)
Good luck with the slab stuff.

	Sam