Re: New Linux Development Model

[Alistair John Strachan <s0348365@sms.ed.ac.uk>]

On Thursday 10 November 2005 15:10, Mark Lord wrote:
[snip]
> Sure, us kernel folk can cope with all of that (in theory,
> though in practice I'm still stuck with 2.6.13 because I haven't
> yet gotten working ipw2200 with 2.6.14, with *either* driver).

I'm probably asking a silly question here, but presumably you've grabbed 
ieee80211 1.1.6 and ipw2200 1.0.8 from their respective websites, compiled 
them, installed them (whilst running 2.6.14) and the resulting driver does 
not work?

> But things just got WAY more complicated for most users of ipw2200.
> Sure, they can ignore us and just continue to run their old vendor
> kernels.  But this means they don't get up-to-date kernels with
> bug fixes and security fixes.  And more importantly to LKML,
> we've now just cut off a potentially large crowd of kernel-testers.
>
> Ugh.  Ugly.

I completely agree with this assessment, I was merely defending the "linux 
development process" which I do not believe to be at fault here.

-- 
Cheers,
Alistair.

'No sense being pessimistic, it probably wouldn't work anyway.'
Third year Computer Science undergraduate.
1F2 55 South Clerk Street, Edinburgh, UK.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/