2002-08-06 17:40:42

by Jeff Garzik

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trivial patch for 2.4.20-pre1 8139too.c driver (fwd)

Russell, Nathaniel wrote:
> My i ask what the sense is to not remove the dead code if
> all we are trying to do is stablize the 2.4x kernel series
> and not add extra code or change around the drivers for
> perticular hardware. The code is not used anymore so why
> keep it in the 2.4x series. The code can stay in the 2.5x
> series no problem because there we can change drivers
> rewrite hardware protocalls and tthings like that.


...because I maintain the driver, and want to keep that code around as a
note to myself.

Jeff




2002-08-06 19:33:22

by Nathaniel Russell

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trivial patch for 2.4.20-pre1 8139too.c driver (fwd)

O K Then


Russell, Nathaniel wrote:
>My i ask what the sense is to not remove the dead code if
> all we are trying to do is stablize the 2.4x kernel
series
> and not add extra code or change around the drivers for
> perticular hardware. The code is not used anymore so why
> keep it in the 2.4x series. The code can stay in the 2.5x
> series no problem because there we can change drivers
> rewrite hardware protocalls and tthings like that.


...because I maintain the driver, and want to keep that
code around as a note to myself.

Jeff