On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 09:34:00PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > What is the relation of drivers/i2c/dmi_scan.c and > > arch/i386/kernel/dmi_scan.c? > > Ours is shamelessly ripped from the kernel. It was the quickest way to > get it working with all kernels, although it was admittedly not nice. > > > It seems to be unhealthy to have two > > files of the same name, because they overwrite their symbol > > files. > > Even if you build the lm_sensors modules outside of the kernel? I never > had a problem, and that's how I do it. Yes, you are right, I didn't think about that compile path. But I know that Red Hat for instance will only think about patching the kernel and not start building out of the tree. Other vendors will probably also follow the monolithic kernel rpm strategy. So it would be good to have the patching method well working, too. > > Should one of these be renamed, or the two files merged? > > It's a bit late to merge them (would mean that lm_sensors would only > work with linux 2.4.26 and above, at best). > > Renaming it is an option, although I can hear MDS complaining from > here, because he doesn't like renaming files under the CVS repository. > > I don't see any other way though. What would an acceptable name be? The bugzilla reporter suggested prepending "i2c-" to the two files. -- Axel.Thimm at physik.fu-berlin.de -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20040224/22e5aacf/attachment.bin
