On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:15:56AM +0200, Rene Herman wrote:But there is no API stability for external modules this way. It simply doesn't make sense to give the few sys_open() abusers even more grace period while changes to the IRQ API affecting nearly everyone are allowed without any requirements of ensuring API stability. I'm not a fan of API stability for external modules, but if API stability was considered important it should be done consequently and not only for some patches that have the bad fate of having to go through Andrew to Linus. 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 -
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| James Bottomley | Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-)) |
| Trent Piepho | Re: [PATCH] fakephp: Allocate PCI resources before adding the device |
| Antonio Almeida | HTB accuracy for high speed |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
git: | |
