From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 21:46:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4516E089.4000004@s5r6.in-berlin.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060924181641.GA4547@stusta.de>
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> But having:
> - two saa7134 cards in your computer and
> - one of them formerly not supported and
> - depending on one of them being the first one
> is a case you can theoretically construct, but then there's the point
> that this is highly unlikely,
Yes, this is an unlikely scenario.
> and OTOH the value of the added support is more realistic.
But then I think people don't really expect additional hardware support
from a stable kernel series.
> If I was as extremely regarding regressions as you describe regarding
> hardware updates, I would also have to reject any bugfixes that are not
> security fixes since they might cause regressions.
>
> I do know that the only value of the 2.6.16 tree lies in a lack of
> regressions and act accordingly, but I'm trying to do this in a
> pragmatic way.
If there was more manpower, driver updates could be maintained as extra
patchkits separately to the kernel. I know that some people would like
to have exactly this: A minimally updated base plus a choice of specific
driver updates as add-ons.
In fact that's what I do with the IEEE 1394 drivers --- although not
primarily to support this kind of user base but rather to make it easier
to get bugfixes tested by bug reporters. However I can only afford to do
this by an all-or-nothing approach: I put almost _all_ driver changes
into these patchkits. That means full risk of regressions but also
complete feature updates and minimal divergence from mainline. This was
trivial to do so far.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-==- =--= ==---
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-24 19:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-22 22:23 Adrian Bunk
2006-09-22 22:38 ` Greg KH
2006-09-22 22:47 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-22 23:09 ` Greg KH
2006-09-23 4:56 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-09-23 23:21 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-23 23:53 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-09-24 7:46 ` Sergey Vlasov
2006-09-24 18:16 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-24 19:46 ` Stefan Richter [this message]
2006-09-24 19:44 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-09-24 20:02 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-09-25 1:01 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-24 10:17 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-25 1:23 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-25 8:15 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-27 5:14 ` Greg KH
2006-09-23 20:49 ` Jean Delvare
2006-09-23 20:57 ` Lee Revell
2006-09-23 21:20 ` Jean Delvare
2006-09-23 22:47 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-23 22:33 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-23 22:47 ` Lee Revell
2006-09-23 22:58 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-23 22:12 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-24 10:12 ` Pavel Machek
2006-09-25 1:20 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-09-24 20:25 ` Grant Coady
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4516E089.4000004@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--to=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome