On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 07:12:29PM -0500, Chuck Anderson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 05:19:24PM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > >>>>> "TE" == Tanguy Eric <eric.tanguy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > TE> http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2965 > > > > Blah, blah, only breaks on Fedora, blah blah, Fedora people don't know > > how to behave. > > > > So exactly what is it that Fedora is doing wrong here? > > The problem is that the rt2x00 driver assumes that there is an API > difference between kernels < 2.6.20 and >= 2.6.20. In truth there is > no guarantee of a stable API at all in Linux, and that keying off > LINUX_VERSION_CODE is next to useless. If you patch the kernel at > all, what version does it become? Perhaps one API changed to be like > Linus' 2.6.20 due to your patch(es), but another API didn't change and > is still like Linus' 2.6.19. An out-of-tree driver that keys off > LINUX_VERSION_CODE can never get this right. You could change the > version code to fix one out-of-tree driver, but then that breaks the > other. Exactly. This is something external driver maintainers just have to deal with if their driver isn't upstream¹. josh ¹ Have is said the word "upstream" enough in this thread? No? Repeat after me... "Upstream, Upstream, it's our way. Upstream, Upstream anything else will ruin your day."² ² I apologize for my crappy cheer. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
