Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 6)

>I'm delighted that this favors "true, false and bool",
>over "TRUE, FALSE and various spellings of BOOLEAN".
>
>Fun stuff to do in the future:

Make people actually accept bool.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/5/1/123 was like a hit in the face wrt. bool.


PS: Can *anybody* tell me why lkml.org is so slow recently?


Jan Engelhardt
-- 
-
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:
  • [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 6)
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 6)
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [patch 2/5] Add the Kconfig option for the stackprotector feature
• Next by Date: RE: [patch] Reorganize the cpufreq cpu hotplug locking to not be totally bizare
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 6)
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 6)
• 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]