Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 May 2003 21:18:18 +0200 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: 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
cu Adrian
--
"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 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/
| |