This fixes a spelling "fix" that resulted in a compile error.
With apologies to Russell King.
diff -ur a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h
--- a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Tue Mar 4 19:29:20 2003
+++ b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Thu Mar 6 11:46:15 2003
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@
#if 0
* The following is to fool mkdep into generating the correct
- * dependencies. Without this, it can't figure out that this
+ * dependencies. Without this, it cant figure out that this
* file does indeed depend on the cpu-*.h files.
#include <asm/cpu-single.h>
#include <asm/cpu-multi26.h>
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Michael Hayes wrote:
>
> This fixes a spelling "fix" that resulted in a compile error.
>
> With apologies to Russell King.
Ugh, please make things like this just write out the full non-contracted
thing. Ie "cannot" is a perfectly fine word, we don't need to force
spelling errors.
Linus
On Thursday 06 March 2003 22:41, Michael Hayes wrote:
Hi Michael,
> This fixes a spelling "fix" that resulted in a compile error.
> With apologies to Russell King.
> diff -ur a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h
> --- a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Tue Mar 4 19:29:20 2003
> +++ b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Thu Mar 6 11:46:15 2003
> @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@
>
> #if 0
> * The following is to fool mkdep into generating the correct
> - * dependencies. Without this, it can't figure out that this
> + * dependencies. Without this, it cant figure out that this
A spelling fix should be a right spelling fix ;)
So either "cannot" or "can not" but not "cant" :)
ciao, Marc
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Michael Hayes wrote:
> >
> > This fixes a spelling "fix" that resulted in a compile error.
> >
> > With apologies to Russell King.
>
> Ugh, please make things like this just write out the full non-contracted
> thing. Ie "cannot" is a perfectly fine word, we don't need to force
> spelling errors.
Nice to see that _someone_ cares :-)
Okay, here it is again with "cannot".
diff -ur a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h
--- a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Tue Mar 4 19:29:20 2003
+++ b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Thu Mar 6 14:03:14 2003
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@
#if 0
* The following is to fool mkdep into generating the correct
- * dependencies. Without this, it can't figure out that this
+ * dependencies. Without this, it cannot figure out that this
* file does indeed depend on the cpu-*.h files.
#include <asm/cpu-single.h>
#include <asm/cpu-multi26.h>
> > This fixes a spelling "fix" that resulted in a compile error.
> > With apologies to Russell King.
> > diff -ur a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h
> > --- a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Tue Mar 4 19:29:20 2003
> > +++ b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Thu Mar 6 11:46:15 2003
> > @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@
> >
> > #if 0
> > * The following is to fool mkdep into generating the correct
> > - * dependencies. Without this, it can't figure out that this
> > + * dependencies. Without this, it cant figure out that this
> A spelling fix should be a right spelling fix ;)
>
> So either "cannot" or "can not" but not "cant" :)
"Can not" is technically wrong.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=104691562715435&w=2
I also fell in to this trap.
John.
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 01:41:35PM -0800, Michael Hayes wrote:
> This fixes a spelling "fix" that resulted in a compile error.
>
> With apologies to Russell King.
Don't bother - its gone in my BK tree, which I'm going to send a request
to Linus to pull shortly.
--
Russell King ([email protected]) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 14:57, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Michael Hayes wrote:
> >
> > This fixes a spelling "fix" that resulted in a compile error.
> >
> > With apologies to Russell King.
>
> Ugh, please make things like this just write out the full non-contracted
> thing. Ie "cannot" is a perfectly fine word, we don't need to force
> spelling errors.
>
> Linus
For yet another alternative:
[steven@spc9 steven]$ cat -n hello.c
1 #if 0
2 /* This won't break anything */
3 #include <bogus.h>
4 #endif
5
6 #if 0
7 * This won't compile
8 #include <missing.h>
9 #endif
10
11 #include <stdio.h>
12 int main()
13 {
14 printf("Hello world!\n");
15 }
[steven@spc9 steven]$ cc -c hello.c
hello.c:7:11: missing terminating ' character
--- linux-2.5.64/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h.orig Thu Mar 6 15:19:17 2003
+++ linux-2.5.64/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Thu Mar 6 15:20:13 2003
@@ -124,9 +124,9 @@
#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
#if 0
- * The following is to fool mkdep into generating the correct
- * dependencies. Without this, it can't figure out that this
- * file does indeed depend on the cpu-*.h files.
+/* The following is to fool mkdep into generating the correct */
+/* dependencies. Without this, it can't figure out that this */
+/* file does indeed depend on the cpu-*.h files. */
#include <asm/cpu-single.h>
#include <asm/cpu-multi26.h>
#include <asm/cpu-multi32.h>
> [[email protected]]
>
> > > This fixes a spelling "fix" that resulted in a compile error.
> > > With apologies to Russell King.
> > > diff -ur a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h
> > > --- a/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Tue Mar 4 19:29:20 2003
> > > +++ b/include/asm-arm/proc-fns.h Thu Mar 6 11:46:15 2003
> > > @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@
> > >
> > > #if 0
> > > * The following is to fool mkdep into generating the correct
> > > - * dependencies. Without this, it can't figure out that this
> > > + * dependencies. Without this, it cant figure out that this
> > A spelling fix should be a right spelling fix ;)
> >
> > So either "cannot" or "can not" but not "cant" :)
>
> "Can not" is technically wrong.
While "can not" is not necessarily bad English, it's uncommon
and should probably be avoided, because its use might produce
sentences ambivalent in meaning.
<quote>
Can/could: modal auxiliary verbs --
...
h/ contracted negative forms are "can't" and "couldn't."
Cannot is usually written as one word.
</quote>
Swan, Michael: Practical English Usage
Oxford University Press, Second Edition, 1995
p. 104, item 122
--
Tomas Szepe <[email protected]>