Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965020AbVLFSmj (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:42:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965018AbVLFSmj (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:42:39 -0500 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.199]:28351 "EHLO wproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965010AbVLFSmi convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:42:38 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=nuIfJr1dwmzhbxble3zGB3gSiKcEWFmyoUYvy6jpisOUPNVr02R/scEyMCbinWvV5YJ8/km1pY7pXJM74xnlt3+IUt9uA8AbGMV74YoJcszr/a9BnqLaEWvt35OhVqypAodlDc4AxJgTbA5EvEN+O4Gev8wzGWA3AvZlCpjyRj8= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:42:37 -0500 From: Dmitry Torokhov Reply-To: dtor_core@ameritech.net To: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Policy for reverting user ABI breaking patches was Re: RFC: Starting a stable kernel series off the 2.6 kernel Cc: Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <20051203135608.GJ31395@stusta.de> <9a8748490512030629t16d0b9ebv279064245743e001@mail.gmail.com> <20051203201945.GA4182@kroah.com> <9a8748490512031948m26b04d3ds9fbc652893ead40@mail.gmail.com> <20051204115650.GA15577@merlin.emma.line.org> <20051204232454.GG8914@kroah.com> <20051205185110.GJ9973@stusta.de> <20051206175017.GF3084@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 875 Lines: 20 On 06 Dec 2005 15:50:55 -0700, Andi Kleen wrote: > And if there is breakage of such kernel-near applications there should > be an *extremly* good reason for this (and minor cleanup isn't such a > reason). For example for the recent udev breakage imho the cleanup > patch that caused this should have just been reverted. It was not a cleanup patch, without it you could not get input events through netlink. I wonder, since udev is fairly closely tied to the kernel, meybe it woudl be beneficial just to fold it in. This way we could keep compatibility with older kernels and rapidly roll out never stuff. -- Dmitry - 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/