Paul Jackson wrote:
Daniel wrote:
Inventing a new name for an existing thing is very poor taste on grounds of
grepability alone.
I wouldn't say 'very poor taste' -- just something that should be
done infrequently, with good reason, and with reasonable concensus,
especially from the key maint
Daniel wrote:
> Inventing a new name for an existing thing is very poor taste on grounds of
> grepability alone.
I wouldn't say 'very poor taste' -- just something that should be
done infrequently, with good reason, and with reasonable concensus,
especially from the key maintainers in the affected
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Jeff Garzik in his infinite wisdom spake thusly:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/gfp.h
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/gfp.h 2006-08-12 12:56:06.0 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/includ
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 17:28 +0200, Indan Zupancic wrote:
> On Sat, August 12, 2006 17:06, Peter Zijlstra said:
> > On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 10:41 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> > Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/gfp.h
> >> >
On Sat, August 12, 2006 17:06, Peter Zijlstra said:
> On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 10:41 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/gfp.h
>> > ===
>> > --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/gfp.h 200
On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 10:41 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/gfp.h
> > ===
> > --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/gfp.h 2006-08-12 12:56:06.0
> > +0200
> > +++ linux-2.6/i
