From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 18:19:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 18:19:11 -0400 Received: from mailout00.sul.t-online.com ([194.25.134.16]:6 "EHLO mailout00.sul.t-online.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 18:19:04 -0400 Date: 29 Jun 2001 00:01:00 +0200 From: kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen) To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <83lrQbz1w-B@khms.westfalen.de> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Cosmetic JFFS patch. X-Mailer: CrossPoint v3.12d.kh7 R/C435 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Organisation? Me?! Are you kidding? In-Reply-To: <7953.993749740@redhat.com> X-No-Junk-Mail: I do not want to get *any* junk mail. Comment: Unsolicited commercial mail will incur an US$100 handling fee per received mail. X-Fix-Your-Modem: +++ATS2=255&WO1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds) wrote on 28.06.01 in : > On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > > I agree the messages can be ugly. But they don't do any harm either, and > > sometimes they're useful. > > I consider them harmful when I start getting annoying patches that start > adding more and more of them. Or when there are enough boot messages that the dmesg buffer overflows. My current (2.2.19pre1 or so) system has that problem. That *is* harm caused by these messages. MfG Kai