[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [linux-tr] Anymore from DJ Barrow -Reply
I couldn't send in tr.c and if_tr.h as patches
( I could have done this against 2.2.3 but it would
have been of little use as any patches applied after
this would probably be broke), they were nearly complete rewrites, the
remainder of the
changes to the files were fairly trivial.
I set my emacs to c-set-style linux today :-(,
I promise my future code will be more Linus compatible
(albeit with gcc extensions).
Thanks Mike for your efforts,
--- Mike Phillips <email@example.com> wrote:
> There hasn't been many comments about the code and I
> think I may know why.
> 1) The existing code works, so people are less
> interested in the changes.
> 2) The code was submitted as entire files against
> 2.2.5. The changes really need to be in the form of
> diff files. I started to generate the diff files,
> but it's more difficult when the indents have all
> been changed, patch throws out every line as a
> change. So I'm having to run both files through
> indent to get some sort of similarity between them,
> then generate the diff. Then modify the generated
> diff to match the 2.2.9 file.
> On DJ's reply:
> 1) gcc extensions, can stay as long as they are in
> the same *recommended* version of gcc. (i.e for now
> 2) Comment / indent style - Sorry, isn't going to
> happen, the files must follow the existing style.
> There is *no* argument about this - it will simply
> never be accepted into the kernel without the
> correct formatting.
> Also: For the changes this major to be accepted into
> the kernel, I am pretty convinced they will have to
> be blessed by Paul as he did the hard work in
> getting the token ring code to its current stage.
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com