linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH] Add key management syscalls to non-i386 archs

To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH] Add key management syscalls to non-i386 archs
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:41:44 -0700
Cc: ak@suse.de, dhowells@redhat.com, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, discuss@x86-64.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@m17n.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-390@vm.marist.edu, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20041020232509.GF995@wotan.suse.de>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <3506.1098283455@redhat.com> <20041020150149.7be06d6d.davem@davemloft.net> <20041020225625.GD995@wotan.suse.de> <20041020160450.0914270b.davem@davemloft.net> <20041020232509.GF995@wotan.suse.de>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 01:25:09 +0200
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote:

> IMHO breaking the build unnecessarily is extremly bad because
> it will prevent all testing. And would you really want to hold
> up the whole linux testing machinery just for some obscure 
> system call? IMHO not a good tradeoff.

Then change the unistd.h cookie from "#error" to a "#warning".  It
accomplishes both of our goals.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>