Re: 2.4.20-aa1 questions.

[GrandMasterLee]

On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 14:58, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 02:54:08PM -0600, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> > what do the following patches actually *fix*?
> > 
> > 00_backout-gcc-3_0-patch-1
> > 00_gcc-30-volatile-xtime-1
> > 
> > I'm trying to get 2.4.20 patched up by using the -aa split patches for
> > 2.4.20 and I'm incorporating only the things I want, but I use gcc 3.2
> > for compiling, and these confused me a bit.
> 
> Oooh,  I had lengthy discussion with andrea on those two.  These patches
> are a) grossly misnamed and b) should be one.  They change xtime to a volatile
> because andrea thinks that's safer.
> 
> The background on the silly naming is that earlier 2.4 kernels had xtime
> not volatile but the prototype (or vice versa) and gcc3 didn't like that.

Ahh...kewl. thanks much. I was thinking that, but I was very confused by
the naming versus the code. (not that I was *that* sure of the code
anyway, but you know.) :)

> So the best idea would be to merge them into 00_xtime_volatile-1 if
> you want to keep them.

Ok...that sounds like a plan. Thanks so much.

-- 
GrandMasterLee <[e-mail]>