Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266084AbUALJAR (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2004 04:00:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266086AbUALJAR (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2004 04:00:17 -0500 Received: from 213-229-38-66.static.adsl-line.inode.at ([213.229.38.66]:52360 "HELO mail.falke.at") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S266084AbUALJAM (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2004 04:00:12 -0500 Message-ID: <400261C9.5000505@winischhofer.net> Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:58:49 +0100 From: Thomas Winischhofer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, de, de-de, de-at, sv MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jsimmons@infradead.org Subject: Re: 2.6.1-mm1: drivers/video/sis/sis_main.c link error References: <20040109014003.3d925e54.akpm@osdl.org> <20040109233714.GL1440@fs.tum.de> <3FFF79E5.5010401@winischhofer.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2196 Lines: 58 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Thomas Winischhofer wrote: > >>The whole framebuffer stuff in 2.6 is ancient. (Look at the file dates.) > > > Note that the fb stuff is ancient because it's basically not maintained as > far as I'm concerned. Erm, well, _I_ know. But I assume you meant this message mainly for the public. > I'm sorry, but this i show it is. The fbcon people have been changing > interfaces faster than they have been fixing bugs in the code. Together You tell me. I actually stopped adapting sisfb for a couple of months during the 2.5 development cycle - I could not keep up with the speed of substantial changes either. > with the fact that most of the development seems to happen in outside > trees, and nobody ever sends me fixes relative to the released tree, this > makes for a pretty bad situation. > > I really think that development should happen in the regular tree, or at > least be synched up in reasonable chunks THAT DO NOT BREAK everything. > > I realize that some fb developers seem to disagree with me, but the fact > is, the way things are done now, fb will _always_ be broken. Most people > for whom the standard kernel works will never test the fb development > trees, so those trees will never get any amount of reasonable testing. As > a result, they WILL be buggy, and synching with them WILL be painful as > hell. Isn't a large part of the fbcon/dev stuff in current 2.6 broken anyway? Could it become worse by merging James' current changes? But I guess this question - as well as the rest of your message - is for James to answer. If the lastest and greatest of the fbdev stuff isn't merged with 2.6.2, I will revert the interface changes in sisfb and send a patch which works with the then-current vanilla kernel. Thomas -- Thomas Winischhofer Vienna/Austria thomas AT winischhofer DOT net *** http://www.winischhofer.net/ twini AT xfree86 DOT org - 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/