From: vds7789@aw2.fsl.ca.boeing.com (Vincent D. Skahan) Subject: Patch2 is a bad patch if it doesn't compile Date: 12 Jun 1992 14:33:53 GMT
sinster@dana.ucsc.edu (Darren Senn) writes:
>In article <myddryn.707907410@hal>, myddryn@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Le Mauvais Sophiste) writes:
>> Ok, I spent an hour or two toying with 0,96a-pl2 and gcc2.11c.
>> Here's what I had to do to get it to compile:
>> 1) Move itimer.c from linux/kernel to linux/lib
>Nope. Don't do that. Very bad. Keep itimer.c in linux/kernel, and either
> a) remove itimer.o from the OBJS line in linux/lib/Makefile,
> b) create an empty itimer.c in linux/lib, or
> c) save the itimer.c that I posted yesterday into linux/lib.
Hasn't anybody comsidered the possibility that a patch that installs
correctly, yet doesn't compile is an incomplete (and therefore invalid)
patch that we shouldn't be using until another comes out to make it
complete (and therefore valid) ?
Could Linus please either release a patch3 so that we're up at the
current version and can just hit 'make' or release a patched-up 'good'
set of sources ???
I thought the whole point of releasing a patch was to permit people
to get to the same baseline version to work off of...
I'm not installing anything above patch1 if I have to tweak anything
to get it to compile...
--
--------- Vince Skahan ----------- vince@atc.boeing.com ---------
Coach: How's a beer sound, Norm?
Norm: I dunno. I usually finish them before they get a word in.