Re: [PATCH] implicit declaration of function `page_cache_release'

 On Sat, Aug 06, David S. Miller wrote:

> From: Olaf Hering <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 17:01:03 +0200
> 
> > So the patch should be reverted? Its only for CONFIG_SWAP=n, rather
> > unusual for KDE/GNOME tainted workstations...
> 
> Not necessarily, but the header dependencies should be fixed
> up somehow.

I think you are right once again.
(Just the time got a bit out of sync.)
-
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/

---

• References:
  • Re: [PATCH] implicit declaration of function `page_cache_release'
    • From: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] implicit declaration of function `page_cache_release'
• Next by Date: Re: [RFT] major libata update
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] implicit declaration of function `page_cache_release'
• Next by thread: APIC error on CPUx
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]