On Monday 06 August 2007, Russell King wrote: > On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 01:38:08PM -0700, David Brownell wrote: > > And since you asked for a build fix ... I have a hard time thinking > > that anything else could really be the "right fix". > > Do you have to drag every discussion right down into the shit pile? > Your message isn't even worth this response. Don't introduce four letter words then. You know the drill: good *technical* arguments are what should win. I agree it would have been easier if I had asked to merge this earlier; like for 2.6.18 as originally planned, or 2.6.22 ... sigh. It never got to the top of the priority list until that Makefile patch forced the issue; and merge windows are filled with stuff that's higher priority. Thing is, I've never been one to prefer short term hacks when a good long-term solution is available. In this case, that solution has been used for over 9 months now, and was presented more than once on LKML. Even now, there are no good technical counter-arguments. So I still think this is the "right fix". _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
