Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error | netdev | Ratatoskr

(off-list ancestor, not in this archive)
Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error · Adrian Bunk <hidden> · 2005-03-16
Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error · chas williams - CONTRACTOR <hidden> · 2005-03-16
Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error · chas williams - CONTRACTOR <hidden> · 2005-03-17
Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error · Adrian Bunk <hidden> · 2005-03-19
Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error · Stephen Hemminger <hidden> · 2005-03-28

Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error

From: Stephen Hemminger <hidden>
Date: 2005-03-28 19:12:23
Also in: bridge, lkml

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

2005-03-15 · Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error · Adrian Bunk <hidden>
2005-03-15 · [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error · Adrian Bunk <hidden>

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 00:04:58 +0100
Adrian Bunk [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 03:36:40PM -0500, chas williams - CONTRACTOR wrote:

quoted

In message [ref],Adrian Bunk writes:

quoted

Letting CONFIG_BRIDGE depend on CONFIG_ATM doesn't sound like a good 
idea, since I doubt all people using the Bridge code require ATM 
support.

how about the following?
...

Looks good

Ditto