Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 14:58:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 14:58:55 -0400 Received: from noodles.codemonkey.org.uk ([213.152.47.19]:23948 "EHLO noodles.internal") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 14:58:45 -0400 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 20:06:48 +0100 From: Dave Jones To: Garrett Kajmowicz Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@cs.earlham.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH, TRIVIAL] 2.4.20-pre8 BeFS Config.in modification Message-ID: <20021001190648.GA24193@suse.de> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , Garrett Kajmowicz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@cs.earlham.edu References: <200210011448.06125.gkajmowi@tbaytel.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200210011448.06125.gkajmowi@tbaytel.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 858 Lines: 22 On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 02:48:06PM -0400, Garrett Kajmowicz wrote: > I am planning on making an effort to move the relevent code for the Config.in > files into the appropriate directory. Attached is a simple patch which will > do this for the BeFS. > > Questions: > Is this appropriate for this list? > Are there any reasons not to do this? If those filesystems had a dozen options each, it'd be worthwhile perhaps. Saving 1-2 lines per-fs for the whole fs/Config.in makes this seem not-so-worthwhile imo, but others may think otherwise.. Dave -- | Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/