From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756217AbYIKQBa (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Sep 2008 12:01:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755906AbYIKQBQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Sep 2008 12:01:16 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:36559 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755885AbYIKQBP (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Sep 2008 12:01:15 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: Allow release-specific firmware dir From: David Woodhouse To: Frans Pop Cc: davem@davemloft.net, jeffm@suse.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Jeff Garzik In-Reply-To: <200809111749.40204.elendil@planet.nl> References: <48C68507.6000609@suse.com> <200809111725.01511.elendil@planet.nl> <1221147068.8593.31.camel@macbook.infradead.org> <200809111749.40204.elendil@planet.nl> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 09:01:09 -0700 Message-Id: <1221148869.8593.34.camel@macbook.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 (2.22.3.1-1.fc9) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 17:49 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Thursday 11 September 2008, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 17:24 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > > Did you read the second part of the mail explaining why having a > > > single "firmware" package is not a good idea? > > > > Yes, but it was nonsense, so I ignored it. "The reason for this is the > > possibility that a driver and its firmware may be dropped from the > > upstream kernel source." That doesn't happen very often, and you > > _certainly_ don't need to immediately drop the firmware if it does. > > Fine. Again you are concentrating on the bright and shiny future and > magically wishing into existence tools to support the new situation. No, the 'new' situation is just like the situation we've had for years for most recent drivers anyway. You've pulled this magic requirement that we split up firmware into separate packages out of a hat, and it's nonsense. Please go away and stop spreading FUD. If there _are_ real issues to deal with, I'd like to deal with them. I believe I already have. But we'd be better off without the pointless noise that some people are creating. -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation