Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 14:54:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 14:54:05 -0500 Received: from willy.net1.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:10256 "EHLO www.home.local") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 14:54:04 -0500 Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 21:00:39 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Margit Schubert-While Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.20 ACPI Message-ID: <20021120200039.GD3636@alpha.home.local> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20021120111430.00b57300@mail.dns-host.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20021120111430.00b57300@mail.dns-host.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1036 Lines: 23 On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 12:02:03PM +0100, Margit Schubert-While wrote: > While I take the point that we are talking about a stable kernel > series, one shouldn't forget that ACPI is configurable :-) So you mean that anything configurable should get into a stable kernel just because users are not forced to configure it ? Unless you have the time to add an option "old ACPI / newer ACPI", you cannot guarantee that there's no risk to break something. If someone has a PC which needs ACPI to boot, and only the older one, you'll break it. One of the next pre-releases would be far more appropriate than an -rc. BTW, I agree that recent ACPI releases seem far more reliable than the one in vanilla kernel, and I would also be glad to get them in a near future, but after .20. Cheers, Willy - 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/