On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hi Len, > > > > On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:55:08 -0800 Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > make[2]: *** No rule to make target `drivers/misc/tc1100-wmi.o', needed by `drivers/misc/built-in.o'. > > > > > > on allmodconfig & allyesconfig for i386. > > > > > > On, moved to drivers/x86/. Someone needs to clean up drivers/misc/Makefile. > > > > Just wondering where the move to drivers/x86 was discussed, (reviewed > > and tested) and why the change is in the acpi tree and not the x86 > > tree? > > it will all conflict with pending bits in the x86 tree, so i'd prefer if > Len did this atomically after 2.6.29-rc1, without it having this > long-term breakage effect. Is linux-next running into a conflict between x86 and the acpi tree today? thanks, -Len -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
