Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756852AbYHaD54 (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Aug 2008 23:57:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750802AbYHaD5s (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Aug 2008 23:57:48 -0400 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.239]:44799 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750780AbYHaD5r (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Aug 2008 23:57:47 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=WxP1lqJCe4yZa+pvYrZnywhH+l/M5kxkWp0R0sjhAvY6chUc0PUohM3QD5gMPmWd7k gWvyR8UBO2bkg8gdCsb0m94d16GQqbq0/dC+m/hd3y35j1eq86H78Bhoi6oHz5Uxes6n agLfRSKJRkyrTVdbbYMWP1ZjIgPfjKveJjuC4= Message-ID: Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 05:57:46 +0200 From: "Markus Rechberger" To: "Steven Toth" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" , "Greg KH" Subject: Re: [linux-dvb] DVB-S2 / Multiproto and future modulation support Cc: "Charles Price" , linux-dvb@linuxtv.org, mrechberger@sundtek.com In-Reply-To: <48B98B89.80803@linuxtv.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <48B8400A.9030409@linuxtv.org> <48B98914.1020800@w3z.co.uk> <48B98B89.80803@linuxtv.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3360 Lines: 73 On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Steven Toth wrote: > Charles Price wrote: >>> If you also feel frustrated by the multiproto situation and agree in >>> principle with this new approach, and the overall direction of the API >>> changes, then we welcome you and ask you to help us. >>> >> >> I wholeheartedly agree. >> >> Although I can't offer any programming input, I do have a variety of DVB >> hardware and different architectures on which I can test your creations. >> >> Happy to help. > not reading the parts above, but saying this is Steven, not caring about the main people who work on something. There's a split between a few people here (including myself) and other people from that scene who just don't care about anything. Manu and the others put in alot work, why screw what he wrote (code) he has been on vacation (I know he married a few weeks ago - since I got the invitation) Hauppauge people (Michael Krufky and Steven Toth) are running their personal own game .. sorry to say that but it's that way. I have logs and mails here where Steven and Mike wrote hey that would be a cool idea about compatibility but when "I" mentioned it again and spent work on it it was like hey we're linux only (I don't only care about linux since I also work alot with commercial companies in that area look at the dibcom website - Job requirement 'independent' code neither do I want to depend on Windows nor Linux but having something that works on both in case of hardware is fine - especially I2C is trivial to realize for everything). Rethink your position and try to get people onboard but don't try to screw people and run your own game. Seeing the comments Acked-By: xyz - I cannot review neither contribute code but I can provide webspace .. hilarious. get down on earth again Steven, Mike expecially Mauro - try to get Manufacturers onboard instead working against you. I talked alot with Manu he has good connections and is avoing to work together just as I am because of certain Monopoly and copyright infringements which you are building here (I see Mauro using leaked code here!) . Mauro is spreading foo, Manu has the specs for xyz. I fully understand Manu's point since Mauro did the same with me, however .. I better don't comment it. Let's put another thing in here: Greg Kroah Hartman Linux Guy reverted my patch in favour of supporting the binary Firmware upload tool of Dell (I fully support Dell here too) although claiming to be opensource but still running after someone (please comment this one - it confused me at 'your' position). It was just like ok let's revert it but not asking why?! I'm just getting up with this just because I saw following yesterday: 21:07 < pmp> hmm: request_firmware(&fw, CX24116_DEFAULT_FIRMWARE, &state->i2c->dev) ? 21:08 < pmp> the &state->i2c->dev looks strange and the kernel is saying that about it: kobject_add failed for i2c-1 with -EEXIST, don't try to re.... 21:09 < pmp> other fe-driver have a callback in their config-struct... 21:09 < pmp> I start to believe there is a reason ;) I better cut it now. Markus -- 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/