From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1031013AbXDPXK4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 19:10:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030991AbXDPXK4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 19:10:56 -0400 Received: from agminet01.oracle.com ([141.146.126.228]:42649 "EHLO agminet01.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030894AbXDPXKz (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 19:10:55 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:13:37 -0700 From: Randy Dunlap To: Tilman Schmidt Cc: "Robert P. J. Day" , i4ldeveloper@listserv.isdn4linux.de, Karsten Keil , LKML Subject: Re: so what *is* obsolete and removable? Message-Id: <20070416161337.d59f2ea3.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <4623FB0E.4080602@imap.cc> References: <4623FB0E.4080602@imap.cc> Organization: Oracle Linux Eng. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.3.1 (GTK+ 2.8.10; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 00:39:10 +0200 Tilman Schmidt wrote: > Am 15.04.2007 22:55 schrieb Robert P. J. Day: > > as i recall, the isdn4linux was *un*obsoleted, wasn't it? > > Actually, it wasn't. > > We *did* reach a consensus that isdn4linux is not obsolete in the > accepted sense of the word, because there is no replacement for it > so far. > > OTOH I have since submitted (twice, in fact) a patch that would remove > the "(obsolete)" label from the Kconfig entry, but somehow nothing > ever became of it. My submissions just linger in LKML, uncommented and > unmerged. Did you submit the patch to Andrew Morton? Is the patch in the -mm patchset? Did Karsten ack the patch? If the patch is in -mm and it's not critical (like this subject), then it probably won't be merged until after 2.6.21 is released... > To sum it up, we agree that the "(obsolete)" label is wrong, but we > won't remove it. I have no idea how to resolve that situation. > > What I do know is that it would be very wrong to remove isdn4linux, > because it has an existing userbase with nowhere else to go. --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***