Subject: Re: compat_nomid
To: Izumi Tsutsui <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Thomas Klausner <email@example.com>
Date: 01/05/2003 14:17:23
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 01:42:18PM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> In article <20030104223236.GF22238@danbala.tuwien.ac.at>
> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > The following ports have code ifdef'd on COMPAT_NOMID without
> > having COMPAT_NOMID (even commented out) in any kernel configs:
> > atari, cesfic, hp300, news68k, x68k
> All of them are derived from hp300 and there is a following comment:
> >> * XXX what are the special cases for the hp300?
> >> * XXX why is this COMPAT_NOMID? was something generating
> >> * hp300 binaries with an a_mid of 0? i thought that was only
> >> * done on little-endian machines... -- cgd
> But I don't know if this is correct or not.
> > Is it ok to remove the (ir)relevant parts?
> If there is no such old binaries that require COMPAT_NOMID,
> it could be removed, I think.
This seems like it should only be there for hp300, or is
it perhaps needed for m68k-binary compatibility across
Thomas Klausner - email@example.com
What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the will to find
out, which is the exact opposite. -- Bertrand Russell