On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 04:03:38PM -0700, Kok, Auke wrote:
> Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 04:40:01PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > > > In any case, this patch should not be merged. We often send it around to users to
> > > > debug their issue in case it involves eeproms, but merging it will just conceal
> > > > the real issue and all of a sudden a flood of people stop reporting *real* issues
> > > > to us.
> > >
> > > Sorry, I disagree. Just as with e100, if there is a clear way the user
> > > can recover their setup -- and Adam says his was effective -- I don't
> > > see why we should be denying users the ability to use their own hardware.
> >
> > Indeed. This is a common enough problem that not including it causes more pain
> > than its worth. I have two affected boxes myself that I actually thought
> > the hardware was dead before I tried ajax's patch.
>
>
> look: You should have reported this to us and you didn't. Now you are using the
> fact that you did not report it as an argument which is out of place.
you're missing the point. It looks like a hardware failure. Why would I report this?
> why do you say it is common? how often have you seen this and not reported it back
> to our support? are you willingly trying to frustrate this issue?
Not at all. The only frustration here is that I used to have a kernel that
worked, upgraded, and thought that my hardware was broken.
How many other users thought the same ?
Dave
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
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]
