Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Parag Warudkar
Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 - 3:22 pm

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:

You don't tell me why you want to do something as absurd and
incoherent as wanting users to load the modules easily and
automatically, then printing a warning about it even when user may not
have loaded it on his/her own, then taint the kernel when there is no
need to - I have repeatedly said it is very easy to see from the
module list for people to decide - not rocket science, definitely not
for developers. The whole TAINT drama is unnecessary.

Why would people run with even 24 more lines for something as absurd
as this when there is no need for the same?

Sure if you want to autoload modules on users back - do not complain
about it, do not make it official that it won't be supported since if
you do all your staging drivers are even more likely to stay there
like EXPERIMENTAL. (i.e. take out the printk , take out the TAINT) -
then it sounds less absurd.

Parag
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Parag Warudkar, (Wed Sep 24, 4:39 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Randy Dunlap, (Wed Sep 24, 6:03 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Parag Warudkar, (Wed Sep 24, 7:59 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Paul Mundt, (Wed Sep 24, 10:27 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Parag Warudkar, (Thu Sep 25, 4:02 am)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Randy Dunlap, (Thu Sep 25, 7:49 am)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Randy Dunlap, (Thu Sep 25, 10:53 am)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Randy Dunlap, (Thu Sep 25, 2:04 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Parag Warudkar, (Thu Sep 25, 2:40 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Stefan Richter, (Thu Sep 25, 2:51 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Parag Warudkar, (Thu Sep 25, 3:22 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Stefan Richter, (Fri Sep 26, 11:36 am)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Parag Warudkar, (Fri Sep 26, 1:11 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Stefan Richter, (Fri Sep 26, 1:39 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Parag Warudkar, (Fri Sep 26, 1:47 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Parag Warudkar, (Fri Sep 26, 1:56 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Leon Woestenberg, (Fri Sep 26, 2:00 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Stefan Richter, (Fri Sep 26, 3:46 pm)
Re: [patch 00/04] RFC: Staging tree (drivers/staging), Andrew Morton, (Thu Oct 9, 2:17 pm)