From: John Bradford <john@grabjohn.com>
To: bunk@fs.tum.de, jgarzik@pobox.com
Cc: davidsen@tmr.com, john@grabjohn.com,
Linux-Kernel@vger.kernel.org, Riley@Williams.Name,
szepe@pinerecords.com
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] let broken drivers depend on BROKEN{,ON_SMP}
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:40:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200308132040.h7DKe7VK002065@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk> (raw)
> > The people who want Linux to be reliable won't be compiling their own
> > kernels, typically. Because, the people that _do_ compile their own
> > kernels have sense enough to disable broken drivers :) That's what Red
> > Hat, SuSE, and others do today.
>
> It occurs quite often that you need e.g. the latest -pre or -ac to
> support some of your hardware.
>
> These are situations when an average systems administrator has to
> compile his on kernel.
That is true. The point is that I don't see how adding an arbitrary
dependency on a CONFIG_BROKEN option actually helps in any way.
Presumably a system administrator who is compiling a -pre or -ac
kernel from kernel.org for a _production_ system is only going to
include drivers that are actually required. If any of those don't
compile, there is a problem anyway. If they are hidden under a
CONFIG_BROKEN option, it's just an extra step to enable them, then
compile with them enabled to get an error to post to LKML.
If something is really necessary, why not simply include an ! in the
description of any option that is known not to compile?
John.
next reply other threads:[~2003-08-13 20:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-13 20:40 John Bradford [this message]
2003-08-13 21:03 ` [2.6 patch] let broken drivers depend on BROKEN{,ON_SMP} Adrian Bunk
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-17 21:27 John Bradford
2003-08-14 5:28 John Bradford
2003-07-31 9:41 John Bradford
2003-08-02 19:48 ` Adrian Bunk
2003-07-30 11:29 John Bradford
2003-07-30 11:37 ` Adrian Bunk
2003-07-30 11:53 ` Jan Evert van Grootheest
2003-07-30 9:11 John Bradford
2003-07-30 10:44 ` Adrian Bunk
2003-07-30 16:04 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-07-30 16:18 ` Adrian Bunk
2003-07-31 9:15 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-08-02 19:47 ` Adrian Bunk
2003-08-13 14:50 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-08-13 15:31 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-08-13 19:17 ` Adrian Bunk
2003-08-13 21:06 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-08-17 9:39 ` Rob Landley
2003-08-18 23:03 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-07-29 19:59 Adrian Bunk
2003-07-30 7:44 ` Riley Williams
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200308132040.h7DKe7VK002065@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk \
--to=john@grabjohn.com \
--cc=Linux-Kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=Riley@Williams.Name \
--cc=bunk@fs.tum.de \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=szepe@pinerecords.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).