From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 03:25:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 03:25:41 -0400 Received: from louise.pinerecords.com ([212.71.160.16]:31237 "EHLO louise.pinerecords.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 03:25:41 -0400 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 09:31:03 +0200 From: Tomas Szepe To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: v2.6 vs v3.0 Message-ID: <20020930073103.GD17884@louise.pinerecords.com> References: <200209290716.g8T7GNwf000562@darkstar.example.net> <20020929091229.GA1014@suse.de> <1033311400.13001.5.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20020929153817.GC1014@suse.de> <20020929215204.GG12928@merlin.emma.line.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20020929215204.GG12928@merlin.emma.line.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > SCSI drivers can be a real problem. Not the porting of them, most of > > that is _trivial_ and can be done as we enter 3.0-pre and people show up > > running that on hardware that actually needs to be ported. The worst bit > > is error handling, this I view as the only problem. > > And a long-standing one. This should have been fixed in 2.2, it has not > been fixed in 2.4, it's much desired for 2.6 -- and people are going to > point away from Linux (and expect Jörg Schilling speaking up again > should 2.6 be released with what he considers broken API -- I cannot > tell if all his items are right, but if a third of what he says is true, > Linux SCSI is not in good shape). As long as most of that bloke's argumentation strips down to "you don't do it like everyone else [solaris/irix/whatever] implies you're bound to suck," nobody with a bit of sense is going to take him seriously regardless of how much blah blah he posts on l-k. T.