From: Ron Gage Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 01:07:10 +0000 Subject: Re: [Kernel-janitors] Compiler cleanups question Message-Id: <200402122007.10738.ron@rongage.org> List-Id: References: <200402121916.14139.ron@rongage.org> In-Reply-To: <200402121916.14139.ron@rongage.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 12 February 2004 07:51 pm, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:44:40 -0500 Ron Gage wrote: > | On Thursday 12 February 2004 07:28 pm, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > | > On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:16:14 -0500 Ron Gage wrote: > | > | Ok, quick question... > | > | > | > | Is it worth while to pursue eliminating the "unused parameters" or > | > | "unused variable" warnings from the 2.6 kernel? > Hm, I might put that kind of patch into the KJ patchset, but I > probably wouldn't send it upstream. IOW, I'd rather see you > spend time on warnings or other bugs that are not so trivial or > pedantic. And I expect that these (your examples above) will > change in the future. > > -- > ~Randy > kernel-janitors project: http://janitor.kernelnewbies.org/ Um - ok! You're the boss, boss! :) -- Ron Gage - LPIC1, MCP, A+, Net+ Pontiac, Michigan _______________________________________________ Kernel-janitors mailing list Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors