On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:39:38AM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
>...
> >NUMAQ can't be hidden since it doesn't has any dependencies.
> >And this isn't what this comment is talking about (note the the
> >comment is only shown if NUMAQ was already select'ed).
> >
> >NUMAQ didn't fulfill the contract that when select'ing NUMA, it has to
> >ensure the dependencies of NUMA are fulfilled. My patch solves this
> >properly instead of telling the user through a comment that he ran into
> >this bug.
>
> Yes, if that works, it's much cleaner. Perhaps we just had insufficient
> config-fu to figure it out ... it looks good - I suppose I'd better test
> it, and make sure we don't hit the same thing we did before.
Have you tested my patch, and if yes, is it OK?
> m.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
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]
