From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 09:49:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 09:49:46 -0400 Received: from smtpzilla3.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.139]:35588 "EHLO smtpzilla3.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 09:49:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 15:55:13 +0200 (CEST) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@serv To: Jeff Garzik cc: Roman Zippel , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel , kbuild-devel Subject: Re: linux kernel conf 0.8 In-Reply-To: <3DA43094.8040104@pobox.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Well, my basic preference is > > * something other than Config.new (the original name in your config system) > * something other than Config.in > > I think it is a mistake to name a totally different format the same name > as an older format... even "config.in" would be better than "Config.in"... My first plan was to use Config.in, but I can't overwrite the old files yet, so I named it Config.new. Personally I only prefer that it starts with a capital letter (like Makefile, Readme), so it's at the top of a dir listing, but otherwise I don't care much about the name. bye, Roman