Messages in this thread |  | | From | Keith Owens <> | Subject | Re: Compilation problems with 2.1.20, incorrectly globalized symbols | Date | Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:26:55 +1100 |
| |
On Wed, 15 Jan 1997 23:37:39 -0500, Buddha Buck <bmbuck@acsu.buffalo.edu> wrote: >As far as I know, Linux has refused to dictate coding style -- the >Documentation/CodingStyle file is a suggestion, not a requirement. To >quote from that file, "Coding style is very personal, and won't _force_ >my views on anybody...".
There is a difference between a personal coding style and coding something that adversely affects other modules. If somebody wants to write a module in Swahili - fine, that's their decision. However if a module is written so it cannot be linked into the same kernel as other modules then it is no longer a personal matter. The latter is the current problem, name space pollution.
>Yes, keeping this from happening again would require work from Linus. >But I doubt that that is going to happen. As Alan Cox stated, most of >the people working on this project consider working drivers more >important than clean drivers, and that is what sets their priorities.
The only work it requires from Linus is a statement that sources should not pollute the global name space. Once that is stated from on high then lesser mortals can analyse the kernels, produce reports and niggle at developers to fix the definitions. OTOH if Linus does not care about this issue then we are wasting our time trying to fix it.
>This is a major issue, and why these problems are best solved by the >maintainers of the particular sections.
Agreed, which is why I'm only producing reports and hoping the developers will look at them. If Linus agrees to a clean name space then eventually we might produce our own patches but that is a last resort.
|  |