On Thursday 2012-10-04 01:16, Anand Avati wrote: >On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Jeff Darcy <jdarcy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>(9) no-op lines in rdma >>This removes lines that are clearly intended as continuations of the >>previous >>one, which is simply incorrect. > >I had a look at that patch again. Removing the two lines is the right thing >to do. It is not intended to be a continuation of the previous line. >noinst_HEADERS explicitly specifies header files to be included into a 'make >dist' tarball, which are otherwise not getting included by default if they >were getting installed into /usr/include (hence "noinst"). What sort of seemed to go out of view also was that the two lines removed are compiler flags - which don't make sense for _HEADERS, since they are not files ;-)
