lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [2.4 PATCH] missing parenthesis
    Date
    Hi Willy, 

    > Thanks for your work at fixing all this code. I'm wondering though,
    > given the type of errors, this code should never have been able to
    > build at all, so that means that it might not be used at all.

    Either not used or #ifdef'ed so much that it is rarely build.

    > As a general rule of thumb, keep in mind that we're not much tempted
    > to fix known unused code, especially if it's unmaintained. The reason

    Maybe dumb question but ... how do I know which parts of code are unused
    and/or unmaintained?

    > is simple : when some code does not work, people who need it often
    > maintain patches in their tree to make it work. When we start changing
    > things there, their patches often apply with rejects. Anyway, *I* am
    > still for a clean kernel because I know that there's nothing more
    > annoying than spending days chasing a bug which we discover was known
    > for years.
    >
    > So what I can propose you is that we :
    > - postpone those patches for 2.4.35-pre

    Ok.

    > - ask maintainers of each of these files if he accepts to fix the
    > file, because some of them are totally against any such change.

    Ok. Couple of questions:

    - how do we do that?
    - do I resend each patch to proper maintainer?
    - if there is no maintainer then what? (btw. is there any other
    more accurate source of MAINTAINERS for each file in the kernel tree?)
    - do I have to resend them once more to LKML?

    > - we would merge the accepted patches and those without any reply
    > which we consider relevant early in the 35-pre cycle so that
    > people have some time to inform us about the potential conflicts
    > they encounter.
    >
    > Quite frankly, there should be very few problems, considering that we
    > have affected more files with the gcc4 patches and that nobody
    > complained.
    >
    > As an exception, if you get some maintainer's approval for some of
    > the patches during 2.4.34 cycle, of course I will merge them first
    > because as I said, it's important to maintain supported code in good
    > shape.
    >
    > Is it OK for you ?

    Sure.

    --
    Regards,

    Mariusz Kozlowski
    -
    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: 2006-12-02 12:05    [W:0.025 / U:61.944 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site