[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Linux 2.5.70
    On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 02:09:43PM -0400, Ricky Beam wrote:
    > Allow me to clarify... I don't mind drivers not working. I *do* mind
    > drivers emitting hundreds of warnings and errors because dozens of things
    > were changed and no one cared to update everything they broke. In some
    > cases, fixing things may be simple (eg. someone removed or renamed a field
    > in a struct somewhere) and in others years of work my be required (eg.
    > the new module interface.)

    Many warnings are for problems that were already present in 2.4 or for
    using deprecated (IOW: working) functions. It might be a thought to
    probably disable deprecated warnings for stable kernel releases (read
    2.6.0, 2.6.1,...) but it's not always a measurement for how far away we
    are from 2.6. And besides, a full build of 2.4.20 with gcc 2.95 gives
    you 103 warnings.

    > In my opinion (as it was in the long long ago), everything in a "stable"
    > release should at least compile cleanly -- "working" comes later after
    > users have been conned into using it.

    IMHO compiling and non-working (or worse: working but data-corrupting)
    is worse than non-compiling. It might be a good idea to let broken
    drivers depend on an (undefined) CONFIG_BROKEN, but this is only a minor
    detail with no influence on the 2.6 schedule.

    > --Ricky



    "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
    of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
    "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
    Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:35    [W:0.020 / U:82.776 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site