Should the HAVE_KERNEL_PLL conditional be abolished?
Eric S. Raymond
esr at thyrsus.com
Sun Dec 3 20:56:38 UTC 2017
Hal Murray <hmurray at megapathdsl.net>:
> The "HAVE_KERNEL_PLL" is used for both of them even though there is nothing
> PLL related to the first usage.
I'm aware. There's a separate HAVE_KERNEL_PPS that conditionalizes the
code for the second case.
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>
My work is funded by the Internet Civil Engineering Institute: https://icei.org
Please visit their site and donate: the civilization you save might be your own.
More information about the devel