![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 30 May 2003 10:21:33 +0200 Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > My personal opinion is a known-to-be-broken 2.4.21 should not be released, > > as a lot of people only try/use the releases and therefore an immediately > > released 2.4.22-pre1 with justins driver will not be a good solution. > > I think you missed the point entirely before. 2.4.21 CANNOT cause > regressions most of all. At this point there is no way to know if the > thing that fixes your machine breaks on 100s others that DO work > correctly in 2.4.20. Even if it would fix 100s and break 1 it's still > not acceptable for stable kernel releases. Unfortunately you miss my point (which is probably too simple to be clearly visible): I want to give some feedback on a topic/problem I am experiencing since _long_. I was _asked_ to do so. Additionally I am stating my _opinion_. I am _not_ telling anybody what to do. I am not in a position to do so. Very likely only _few_ people are in such a position, very likely the maintainer of aic and hopefully Marcelo. Have you read all available bug reports Justin got? If you have not, don't play with numbers. Another personal opinion: software development tends to make things possible that "cannot be". ;-) Regards, Stephan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||