| 1 |
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 17:06:20 -0700 Greg KH <gregkh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
| > The 2.6.x patchset is a *lot* cleaner. I'm not the only dev who |
| 3 |
| > still has strong objections to at least one of the patches that's |
| 4 |
| > included in there, however. |
| 5 |
| |
| 6 |
| Which one, supermount? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
No, supermount is just pointless, since we've got udev and dev.d, but |
| 9 |
it's cleanly =Nable and off by default so I doubt many people really |
| 10 |
care. The objectionable patch is bootsplash. Chances are everyone's |
| 11 |
already heard wesolows' rant about this, and I agree with everything he |
| 12 |
says, so I won't repeat it here. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
(Incidentally, until recently bootsplash would change the fb code even |
| 15 |
when it was disabled, and it screwed thing up enough that I had to |
| 16 |
revert the patch.) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
| As of right now, there are only 4 "features" added to the g-d-s kernel |
| 19 |
| package, all for very good reason. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Is one of those reasons "looking pretty at the expense of hiding the |
| 22 |
messages which show why your keyboard isn't working"? :) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Sparc, MIPS, Vim, Fluxbox) |
| 26 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 27 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives