On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 01:03:25PM +0000, Ian Abbott wrote: > On 28/10/07 18:02, Frank Mori Hess wrote: > > On Sunday 28 October 2007 12:55, Greg KH wrote: > >> On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:19:31PM -0400, Frank Mori Hess wrote: > >>> On Friday 26 October 2007 00:38, Greg KH wrote: > >>>> Some of the things you might not want in the cvs tree (#ifdef > >>>> removals for old kernel versions), but the majority should not be an > >>>> issue (typedef removals, whitespace, proper driver core integration, > >>>> etc.) > >> What about these issues? Will you take patches to remove the backward > >> compatibility portions of comedi? > > > > Yes. Although, most of the remaining compatibility code has always been > > kept in separate header files that are transparently included before the > > kernel's real headers. So there should be no need to remove it. > > Might be worth creating a CVS branch for the kernel inclusion patches to > avoid leaving the trunk in an unusable state. That wouldn't be good unless merges back happen often. I've used cvs enough to hate branches and the merges between them to never want to do that again in my lifetime if possible... thanks, greg k-h
