On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:48:07PM -0500, John W. Linville wrote: > Hmmm...I guess there was some misunderstanding between us. I reckon > that I didn't catch that you were making a distinction between > compat-wireless and my tree that it pulls from. I thought the > objection was to building a separate package from the kernel spec. Earlier in this thread I mentioned wanting to avoid this situation: <user> my wireless is broken. *files bug* <us> install compat-wireless! <user> ok, it worked! Why don't we just make this code the default, and have it just work. > FWIW, using the compat-wireless version is a lot less work, since all > the backporting bits should be done already. And it takes advantage > of the backporting skills of the members of that project, rather > than relying solely on me. I think it is a better way to proceed, > and one I can actually commit to doing. How I see this making most sense : f15/f16: what you have in compat-wireless, but apply it as default so we ship *those drivers* rather than what was in 3.1 master: git-wireless.next > > (also, having it be a tarball is a pain wrt review) > > True, but I'm not sure that a giant patch w/ all the wireless-next > bits in it would be any easier on the eyes...? If there's a one-liner that needs fixing up, it means recreating and reuploading a new tarball. When these changes happen in tarballs, it's entirely opaque when it goes to the commits list. We have no idea what changed. Dave _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
