Am 15.04.2007 22:55 schrieb Robert P. J. Day: > as i recall, the isdn4linux was *un*obsoleted, wasn't it? Actually, it wasn't. We *did* reach a consensus that isdn4linux is not obsolete in the accepted sense of the word, because there is no replacement for it so far. OTOH I have since submitted (twice, in fact) a patch that would remove the "(obsolete)" label from the Kconfig entry, but somehow nothing ever became of it. My submissions just linger in LKML, uncommented and unmerged. To sum it up, we agree that the "(obsolete)" label is wrong, but we won't remove it. I have no idea how to resolve that situation. What I do know is that it would be very wrong to remove isdn4linux, because it has an existing userbase with nowhere else to go. -- Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: [email protected] Wehrhausweg 66 Fax: +49 228 4299019 53227 Bonn Germany
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: so what *is* obsolete and removable?
- From: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
- Re: so what *is* obsolete and removable?
- References:
- so what *is* obsolete and removable?
- From: "Robert P. J. Day" <[email protected]>
- so what *is* obsolete and removable?
- Prev by Date: Repair-driven file system design (was Re: ZFS with Linux: An Open Plea)
- Next by Date: Re: [OOPS] 2.6.21-rc6-git5 in cfq_dispatch_insert
- Previous by thread: Re: so what *is* obsolete and removable?
- Next by thread: Re: so what *is* obsolete and removable?
- Index(es):
 |