ethericalzen@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:25:44 -0600
Mike McCarty <Mike.McCarty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> took out a #2 pencil and
scribbled:
Hmm... Not the best way to start an "apology" ;-)
Who appointed you moderator? I guess I'll have to go back to the
Red Hat website and reread the moderator list.
You're a snippy one aren't you? ^_^
I think you take my text to be mean and combative. It's not really.
Ok. It certainly seemed so. But then this entire thread is IMO
unnecessarily combative. So I may have a perceptual problem.
all I'm saying is, discussion of kernel driver interfacing is not
really a _user_ issue. Last time I checked, users (unless the user
is also a developer) dont' do development. So if you want interface
Umm, users live with what the developers develop. It is not specifically
a *Fedora* issue, it affects all distros.
changes to be done for more robust driver implementation and
usability, kernel developers are the people you want to address
your complaints and ideas with.
Well, I personally don't have a problem with that, since I don't
use that video card. But the issue remains as a general topic.
Your sarcasm is noted, and I apologize to you if you believe I was
attempting to assert some authority over you and Mr. Lux; however,
[snip]
Apology accepted.
Your comments notwithstanding, it is IMO worthwhile to attempt
to rally others to one's viewpoint and discussing what goals
might be set before going to the developer's fora. I suggest
that, instead of whining, one start to develop a list of requirements
which would resolve this issue more or less permanently.
We already have the "captive NTFS" project which loads "foreign"
device drivers. Why not build upon that effort? Isn't this something
worthy of discussion?
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
