On Sun, 18 Feb 2007, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Would it be possible to get this patch merged
> (or at least DEPRECATED part of it)?
>
> I think that the patch is useful and that the distinction between
> DEPRECATED and OBSOLETE options is quite clear:
>
> * DEPRECATED == new better code is available, old code scheduled for removal
>
> * OBSOLETE == no replacement yet but the code is broken by design
> and unreliable, not scheduled for removal yet (BTW Robert, I think
> CONFIG_OBSOLETE should also be "default y", at least initially)
for the most part, that doesn't matter to me one way or the other but,
personally, i'd make obsolete kernel features default to "n". after
all, if someone has gone to the trouble to actually make that config
option *depend* on OBSOLETE, that's a powerful argument that you
should have to work a bit to get it back again. :-)
but i'm good either way.
rday
p.s. for people who missed it the first time, a record of the initial
discussion is here:
http://kerneltrap.org/node/7593
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
