On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 04:20:01PM -0700, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 01:04:36 +0200
> Adrian Bunk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 03:47:02PM -0700, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> > >
> > > fine by me - let's NAK this patch (and all future ones for this driver) until
> > > someone with hardware steps up to maintain this driver. Eventually it
> > > will just die I guess.
> >
> > We have tons of unmaintained drivers and none of them has such a silly
> > auto-NAK policy.
> >
> > cu
> > Adrian
>
> OK - "all future ones" was too extreme. I'll take trivial patches (of
> which this one is not).
As I've wrote in the patch description, all it does is to remove an if()
check that could never be false (which is easily verifyable if you look
at the source code).
I've also verified that my patch does not change a single bit in the
object file (after compilation with gcc 4.2.1).
What's your definition of a trivial patch?
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
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]
