From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 02:34:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 02:34:59 -0400 Received: from 12-231-242-11.client.attbi.com ([12.231.242.11]:20238 "HELO kroah.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 02:34:58 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 23:37:38 -0700 From: Greg KH To: jbradford@dial.pipex.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (WAS Re: [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem Message-ID: <20021004063738.GB4260@kroah.com> References: <20021003223028.GB2221@kroah.com> <200210040633.g946XwV4000177@darkstar.example.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200210040633.g946XwV4000177@darkstar.example.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 07:33:58AM +0100, jbradford@dial.pipex.com wrote: > > > Hmmm, then for 3.0 I'd vote for fully working and proven stable: > > > > Hm, how do you "prove" any of these are stable :) > > Hmm, yeah, I see what you mean, but for me, proved stable is a couple > of years of being in a major distribution, with people actually using > it. Ah, so no one actually uses those things in your list. So glad to hear that... > > > * USB (2) > > > > Present in 2.5 (and 2.4 now too) > > ..and yet there are still complaints that it doesn't work every day on the list. Hm, must have missed those. I haven't seen any USB 2.0 complaints in quite some time. The majority of USB "issues" are crappy usb storage devices that don't match the USB storage spec, or PCI IRQ routing problems. But hey, no one cares about USB, I'm used to it :) greg k-h