[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 11:37:53 +0200
From: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To: Trent Piepho <xyzzy@...akeasy.org>
Cc: "D. Kelly" <user.kernel@...il.com>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
"mailing list: linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux I2C <i2c@...sensors.org>
Subject: Re: Problem with restricted I2C algorithms in kernel 2.6.26!
Hi Trent,
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 16:41:10 -0700 (PDT), Trent Piepho wrote:
> Expecting every developer to keep abreast of linux-next and the tens of
> thousands of patches it gets just isn't realisitic.
>
> The embedded platforms I develop on won't run linux-next. Continuously
> porting them to linux-next is simply impossible. The man hours required to
> do that would be staggering.
Once again a "believe me it's impossible" without any good reason
given. I fail to see why embedded platforms would be any different from
other platforms or subsystem trees. Please enlighten me.
> The pool of testers available to a driver that requires running linux-next
> is going to be orders of magnitude less that a driver that can be compiled
> out of tree against 2.6.19 to 2.6.27.
Except that distributions start packaging linux-next, while in general
they don't package out-of-tree versions of packages that are also
available in the kernel tree. If the v4l-dvb tip was in linux-next (it
isn't, is it?), I suspect that you would get many more testers than you
have at the time being. Which doesn't mean that you can't additionally
provide out-of-tree drivers for older kernels if you think it's worth
the additional effort (I don't think it is, but it's up to whoever does
the work.)
--
Jean Delvare
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists