On Fri Sep 10 10, John Baldwin wrote: > On Thursday, September 09, 2010 3:50:45 pm Alexander Best wrote: > > On Thu Sep 9 10, Alexander Best wrote: > > > On Thu Sep 9 10, Alexander Best wrote: > > > > hi there, > > > > > > > > except for arm most archs seem to enforce uart support in conf/DEFAULTS. is > > > > this really necessary? shouldn't DEFAULTS only contain vital devices/options > > > > without a kernel on a specific arch won't function at all? > > > > > > jhb just explained to me, that the uart entry in DEFAULTS is not a controller > > > or something like that, but the uart backend to use *if* uart gets defined in > > > the kernel config. > > > > > > sorry for the noise folks. > > > > however i found some missing comments and incorrect syntax which i fixed. > > > > see the attached patch. > > I think the ia64 ordering for 'io and mem' is probably more correct > (alphabetically sorted), so I would fix i386 and amd64 and leave ia64 alone. > > The powerpc 'machine' changes are wrong I think as it would break GENERIC64 > and powerpc64 kernel configs in general. Nathan purposefully removed > 'machine' from the powerpc DEFAULTS. thanks for the feedback. i'll hack in the changes and will send out a new patch on monday or so. :) cheers. alex > > -- > John Baldwin -- a13xReceived on Fri Sep 10 2010 - 10:27:48 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:07 UTC