On Thu, 2006-08-24 at 15:47 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> > Is there a reason why these can be moved to a arch-neutral place ?
> I think a good place for BC would be kernel/Kconfig.bc
I think kernel/bc/Kconfig is fine.
> but still this should be added into archs.
> ok?
Sourcing the bc Kconfig from arch Kconfigs would seem to suggest that
resource management is only possible on a proper subset of archs. Since
this is not the case wouldn't it be better to source the bc Kconfig from
an arch-independent Kconfig (init/Kconfig for example)?
> > PS: Please keep ckrm-tech on Cc: please.
Also, thank you for CC'ing CKRM-Tech with your earlier posting of these
patches.
> Sorry, it is very hard to track emails coming from authors and 3 mailing lists.
Yes, it can be difficult to keep track of all the email authors.
> Better tell me the interested people emails.
CC'ing only the known-interested people wouldn't be better. If anything
I think it's harder for everyone than simply CC'ing a relevant mailing
list like LKML and CKRM-Tech in this case.
Cheers,
-Matt Helsley
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
