Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 13 Aug 2002 09:25:05 -0700 (PDT) | From | "Randy.Dunlap" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cdrom sane fallback vs 2.4.20-pre1 |
| |
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, James Bottomley wrote:
| rddunlap@osdl.org said: | > and that's precisely the wrong attitude IMO. | | I wasn't expressing an opinion, just stating what could and could not be done | in 2.4.
I guess that at least Jens and I (not trying to speak for Jens) see it as a style issue and somewhat as an education issue. At least we both used /IMO/i.
| > I was glad to see that Marcelo asked about the hardcoded values. They | > hurt. | | Well, this is a rather big and particularly rancid can of worms. If you look | a little further, you'll see that cdrom.h has its own definition of the | (effectively SCSI) struct request_sense that sr.c uses, yet the sense key is | defined in scsi/scsi.h. Then you notice that cdrom.h also duplicates all of | the scsi commands with a GPCMD_ prefix. | | If you'd like to take this particular can of worms off somewhere, clean it out | and return it neatly labelled, I'd be more than grateful...just don't take the | lid off too close to me.
I'm not sure that it could ever get by Jens, but I'll take a look at it.
-- ~Randy
- 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/
|  |