Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751148AbWBZWMx (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:12:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751175AbWBZWMx (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:12:53 -0500 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.194]:46931 "EHLO wproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751148AbWBZWMw convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:12:52 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=JOeDg8aOykw4p0spvvSgb/3FlD3AvVi51dyCOI807E/S6457aCKfVKKLLYkvEdPiDmJ0ODc+IYewUh0/GbA0Uh8KREnWEI9TsJQNN+qMWOb0L3OAalDSce4URHIQju6RbrsmA/KFrOFKLCtSq+vQKD9kxcrgfNe/Zj+7j9c9BPQ= Message-ID: <9a8748490602261412x6f610253mf0a991bd76cded89@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 23:12:51 +0100 From: "Jesper Juhl" To: "Lee Revell" Subject: Re: Building 100 kernels; we suck at dependencies and drown in warnings Cc: Nix , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1140991706.24141.183.camel@mindpipe> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <200602261721.17373.jesper.juhl@gmail.com> <1140986578.24141.141.camel@mindpipe> <87wtfh3i9z.fsf@hades.wkstn.nix> <9a8748490602261349v381933b9xeb2ddeedac053910@mail.gmail.com> <1140990819.24141.176.camel@mindpipe> <9a8748490602261356l222c9689w8fa1d5e2395bb183@mail.gmail.com> <1140991706.24141.183.camel@mindpipe> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1247 Lines: 33 On 2/26/06, Lee Revell wrote: > On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 22:56 +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > Yeah so gcc is not perfect, but that still doesn't change that the > > intention of the warning and the use of the word "might" is as I said > > above. > > Not a very compelling case for changing the kernel rather than getting > GCC fixed. > I think we are misunderstanding eachother. Or rather, I seem to have misread what Nix wrote. I saw "(i.e., there's a reason that warning uses the word *might*.)" and mistakenly read it as a question - "is there a reason that warning uses the word *might*?". I then proceeded to answer that question. When I read your latest mail I then couldn't make sense of things any longer and went back and read the previous mails again and realized my mistake. My bad, sorry. -- Jesper Juhl Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - 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/