Am 22.04.2007 00:10 schrieb David Miller: > From: Alan Cox <[email protected]> > Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:58:44 +0100 > >> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:07:51 +0200 >> Tilman Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> From: Tilman Schmidt <[email protected]> >>> >>> The "obsolete" label on the ISDN_I4L Kconfig option is not, and >>> has never been, accurate. It has already prompted repeated attempts >>> to remove actively used functionality from the kernel without a >>> working replacement. This patch removes the incorrect label and >>> corrects the accompanying help text. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Tilman Schmidt <[email protected]> >> Nak-by: Alan Cox <[email protected]> >> >> If it isn't obsolete then fix the code to use the newer APIs Why should that be a precondition for removing the incorrect "obsolete" label? The code works, and adapting it to newer APIs is the job of those who introduced those newer APIs in the first place, according to the oft-touted stable_api_nonsense.txt policy document. In fact I suspect the incorrect "obsolete" label is a major reason why they haven't done that job so far. Anyway, I'm not the right person for that job. I know neither the code in question nor those newer APIs well enough to do it. I am just trying to help by correcting an error I found. That doesn't make me responsible for every other problem that code may have. >> as its about >> to end up && BROKEN let alone Obsolete. That can't happen. Any change that breaks isdn4linux before its replacement is ready would constitute a regression. We've been there once, remember? > There is zero work being done on that subsystem to freshen it up > and make it current in any way. Not true. What is true, however, is that the main effort of ISDN development is currently going into the future replacement for isdn4linux, the CAPI subsystem. But that's no reason to mark the current one as obsolete before the time. > Lack of a working replacement is not an argument for anything. I beg to differ. Existence of a working replacement is exactly the criterion we arrived at when discussing the meaning of the term "obsolete". So lack of a working replacement *is* an argument for concluding that something is not obsolete. To sum it up: - The "obsolete" label on the isdn4linux subsystem is, and has always been, incorrect. - The authors of certain in-kernel API changes seem to have neglected the isdn4linux subsystem in their work. - These are two independent problems. Blocking the correction of one of them because the other one still exists doesn't help, but only risks deadlock. I therefore kindly ask you to accept this patch even though I cannot offer a remedy for the other gripes you have with the isdn4linux subsystem, and even though you might personally not have any use for that subsystem. Thanks, Tilman -- Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: [email protected] Bonn, Germany - In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- [PATCH] Remove "obsolete" label from ISDN4Linux (v3)
- From: Tilman Schmidt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Remove "obsolete" label from ISDN4Linux (v3)
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Remove "obsolete" label from ISDN4Linux (v3)
- From: David Miller <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] Remove "obsolete" label from ISDN4Linux (v3)
- Prev by Date: Re: [ck] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Staircase Deadline cpu scheduler version 0.45
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] mtd_blkdevs: Convert to use the kthread API
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Remove "obsolete" label from ISDN4Linux (v3)
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Remove "obsolete" label from ISDN4Linux (v3)
- Index(es):