At 10:02 AM 9/3/2001 +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > At 02:16 AM 7/13/2001 +0900, Noriyuki Soda wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 10:15:32 -0700,
> > >         Matt Thomas <matt@3am-software.com> said:
> > >
> > > >> If you are thinking about directory hierarchy which are shareable
> > > >> on same ${MACHINE_CPU}, you should use platform independent
> > > >> mailing list rather than port-arm for the discussion.
> > >
> > > > Depends.  I'm not sure I agree.
> > >
> > > >> I think arm ports should revive /usr/include/machine, at least until
> > > >> consensus is made.
> > >
> > > > I disagree.  arm is currently the test case and leaving it as is will
> > > > cause us to find the problems and address them.
> > >
> > >If everything worked fine, it was ok.
> > >But the change breaks "make build" on even arm port.
> >
> > Not every.  arm32 still works.  Only the new ports are
> > currently broke,
>
>And two months later it's still "broke".  How do you plan to fix this? and
>when can we expect to see it?  I really need to build a new ARM world that
>isn't "arm32".

Try it now.  I merged the two pcb's together with a union for divergent parts.

--
Matt Thomas               Internet:   matt@3am-software.com
3am Software Foundry      WWW URL:    http://www.3am-software.com/bio/matt/
Cupertino, CA             Disclaimer: I avow all knowledge of this message