Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:19:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:19:51 -0400 Received: from copper.ftech.net ([212.32.16.118]:60367 "EHLO relay5.ftech.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 11:19:50 -0400 Message-ID: <7C078C66B7752B438B88E11E5E20E72E0EF52B@GENERAL.farsite.co.uk> From: Kevin Curtis To: "'Krzysztof Halasa'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Alan Cox , Jeff Garzik , Francois Romieu , henrique@cyclades.com Subject: RE: 2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas? Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:18:25 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2609 Lines: 69 Hi, we use the generic HDLC module (by patch) in 2.4 with our FarSync card. I would be happy for it to be incorporated into the 2.4 Kernel. We don't use sethdlc, we have our own configuration utility. We are finding that some distro's are now incorporating the patch anyway (Mandrake for example), and some of our customers are getting confused when the patch doesn't install cleanly because it is already there. Especially if the customer doesn't understand patch anyway and is just following install instructions. What 2.4 version would you aim for? Kevin Curtis Linux Development FarSite Communications Ltd kevin.curtis@farsite.co.uk tel: +44 1256 330461 fax: +44 1256 854931 http://www.farsite.co.uk -----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Halasa [mailto:khc@pm.waw.pl] Sent: 19 September 2002 14:33 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Alan Cox; Jeff Garzik; Francois Romieu; henrique@cyclades.com Subject: 2.4 + generic HDLC update? Any ideas? Hi, The question is probably aimed mainly at people maintaining 2.4 Linux and/or networking, but I'd like to see an opinion of other users/ developers as well. What do you think about updating the 2.4 generic HDLC layer to the newer 2.5 code? Facts: - it would break all sethdlc compatibility, users would be required to get 2.5 sethdlc.c and recompile it. There are even cosmetic sethdlc syntax changes and additions (sethdlc is a configuration tool). - it would make it possible to support new boards like Cyclades PC300 (not only this one). - drivers which are in current 2.4 include Moxa C101 and RISCom/N2, which are older ISA cards. Most of their users currently use 2.5 generic HDLC (a patch) with 2.4 kernels anyway. - the other driver affected is DSCC4, but I know exactly nothing about it (a 2.5 version of it is, of course, available). What do you think, Francois? The update, if any, wouldn't take place yet. I would expect it to happen after some remaining questions regarding 2.5 code are resolved - chances are there will be small changes to 2.5 generic HDLC interface first. -- Krzysztof Halasa Network Administrator - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/