Am Mittwoch 22 Juli 2009 00:16:54 schrieben Sie: > Am Dienstag, den 21.07.2009, 11:20 +0200 schrieb cyber.bogh: > > Am Dienstag 21 Juli 2009 05:27:01 schrieben Sie: > > > Am Montag, den 20.07.2009, 13:40 -0700 schrieb Andrew Morton: > > > > On Mon, 20 Jul 2009 13:21:33 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > > Trent Piepho <xyzzy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 20 Jul 2009, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > (switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not > > > > > > via the bugzilla web interface). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guys, this is reportedly a post-2.6.30 regression - I'll ask > > > > > > Rafael to add it to the regression tracking list. > > > > > > > > > > > > btw, does the flexcop driver have a regular maintainer? Or > > > > > > someone who wants to volunteer? MAINTAINERS is silent about it.. > > > > > > > > > > I produced a patch that fixed this problem over a month ago, > > > > > http://www.linuxtv.org/hg/~tap/v4l-dvb/rev/748c762fcf3e > > > > > > > > Where is that patch now? It isn't present in linux-next. > > > > > > > > If it needs to be resent, please cc me on it? > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, is there any way of avoiding this? > > > > > > > > +#define FE_SUPPORTED(fe) (defined(CONFIG_DVB_##fe) || \ > > > > + (defined(CONFIG_DVB_##fe##_MODULE) && defined(MODULE))) > > > > > > > > That's just way too tricky. It expects all versions of the > > > > preprocessor to be correctly implemented (unlikely) and there are > > > > other tools like unifdef which want to parse kernel #defines. > > > > > > > > otoh the trick does produce a nice result and doing it any other way > > > > (which I can think of) would make a mess. > > > > > > > > > Maybe it should go into 2.6.31? > > > > > > > > It depends on the seriousness of the regression (number of people > > > > affected, whether there's a workaround, etc) and upon the riskiness > > > > of the patch. > > > > > > > > But sure, we don't want regressions and letting one be released when > > > > we already know about it and have a fix would be bad! > > > > > > > > If the patch is judged too risky at this time, there might be a > > > > simpler one, perhaps. > > > > > > > > Or just revert whichever patch broke things. Your changelog > > > > describes this as simply "A recent patch" (bad changelog!) so I am > > > > unable to judge this. > > > > > > Just revert it and let's wait for the next better attempt. > > > > > > We might get a lot of noise, but the patch was wrong. > > > > Absolutely nothing was wrong. > > Your pure existance here is wrong if there is something wrong here! > > As long as you do not have any clue about the subject I advise you to > > simply shut up, Pitton! > > Is that clear, Pitton??? > > > > cyber.bogh > > As always and as expected ;) > > Uwe, use at least your real name, if you say you are not trolling this > time and serious about it. Bad enough, that you always have to come with > new names and addresses. > > The way you dealt with Boris reporting his trouble was disgusting. As long as idiots do not start to think they should be smashed right into their faces..... > Started here. > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-media/msg07746.html > > Likely Matthias giving the hint with the #ifdef MODULE stuff has no clue > either ??? > > Trent's patches converting the tuners to dvb-pll later are not yet in > rc3 and the above fix attempt also not, but are all in mercurial > v4l-dvb. All not needed? The question is: Why is this crap in Mercurial? The answer is: Chehab policy! What does "Chehab policy" mean? Well, it means that if you're Trent Piepho your stuff will be pulled in, even if it is the biggest thinkable crap that one ever can imagine. For every other person really investigating and bringing in substantially better stuff there will be a public request whether there are objections or not (plus other possible hindrances of the more unfair kind), while people owing a repo at linuxtv.org are being trusted blindly. This policy I would compare to the functionality of a small reactionary village of petit bourgeois small brains (i. e. IQ extremely limited - somewhere in the Southern states of the US perhaps?). In other and thus quite non-misunderstanding words: It's definitely NOT the task of Andrew Morton to take care that crap like this never reaches any relevant tree, may it be kernel or may it be Mercurial: +#define FE_SUPPORTED(fe) (defined(CONFIG_DVB_##fe) || \ + (defined(CONFIG_DVB_##fe##_MODULE) && defined(MODULE))) It's Chehab's task and noone else's. Basta! And shall I tell you what the biggest pain about it all is? Chehab is no single example. So-called "maintainers" more and more degenerate to gatekeepers and patch samplers that wink through untested crap and thus produce unusable kernels. "Responsible and honest behaviour" does not seem to exist in those no brains. But: Sorry if I overestimated your real IQ capabilities, Pitton! cyber.bogh > Why you don't provide Andrew with the information he is asking for? > > Cheers, > Hermann -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
