From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:40:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:40:05 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:38785 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:39:52 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:38:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20010817.163803.125896302.davem@redhat.com> To: phillips@bonn-fries.net Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, riel@conectiva.com.br, tpepper@vato.org, f5ibh@db0bm.ampr.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.9 does not compile [PATCH] From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20010817222031.11A03246E39@mail2.bonn-fries.net> In-Reply-To: <20010817.151131.85413979.davem@redhat.com> <20010817222031.11A03246E39@mail2.bonn-fries.net> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.0 on Emacs 21.0 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Daniel Phillips Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 01:34:28 +0200 On August 18, 2001 12:11 am, David S. Miller wrote: > What bothers me is all the time being spent arguing about it. It would be safe to conclude it's a universally unpopular change. Well, to be fair, popularity sometimes isn't much of an indicator. Often people argue things because of change itself. Having to do something differently can make people feel uneasy, so they resist the change. Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com