On Sun 2008-10-26 21:22:16, Johannes Berg wrote:
quoted text
> On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 13:18 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> > > Is it common practice to have compatibility options default to
> > > "y"?  I'm not saying it shouldn't be, just wondering if it has been
> > > traditionally?
> > 
> > yes
> > 
> > default should be "keep working as before"
> > 
> > it's not always nice, especially if you're trying to get rid of some
> > nasty stuff, but think of it this way: you should be able to use a
> > new kernel on an existing distro, at least for a reasonable type of
> > distro (eg something shipped in, say, the last 2 years). In this case:
> > even Fedora 10 is not likely to work!
> 
> Well, actually, it _ought_ to work fine, with a smaller set of channels,

Really? It will still break if your AP uses one of those channels, right?


-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/