On 11/3/05, Krzysztof Halasa <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > IMO porting/rewriting host-drivers to libata now is just
> > counter-productive waste of time...
>
> That would only make sense if you consider all PATA obsolete/dead
> (do you? I'm sometimes not sure).
I want to merge old IDE driver w/ libata... and drop remaining crap on the way.
If libata gains full PATA support before I do this - it is even better for me...
> I don't and (unable to use old IDE due to hot-plug issues) am thankful
> for Alan's efforts.
Do you think that libata is currently so much better wrt to PATA
hot-(un)plug support?
If so than dream on...
> Yes, I think it's similar to OSS-ALSA, WRT - you know, 6-months forward
> notice etc :-)
Ain't going to happen...
Guys, I'm not against libata PATA support - I'm all for it but I want
TRANSPARENT development and FAIR look at current state of affairs
(there is still a lot of stuff on libata's PATA TODO)...
Plus I don't like needless bashing of IDE driver which is still messy
but orders of magnitude less than during 2.4.x days... :-)
Bartlomiej
-
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]
