On Tuesday 20 February 2007 17:27, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 19:35:07 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > 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
>
> Is that really the consensus on these definitions? I thought it was
> more or less the opposite:
>
> * DEPRECATED == no (complete) replacement available yet, but it has
> been decided that this code is less than optimal and alternatives
> should be preferred
>
> * OBSOLETE == replacement available, no reason to use this code anymore
Indeed, this way it makes more sense for me but I'll leave the definitive
answer to a native speaker(s).
Bart
-
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]
