Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Peter Johanson <latexer@g.o>
To: Eric Noack <eric.noack@×××.de>
Cc: gentoo-dev@g.o, chadh@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] which contribution prefered - to gentoo or to project itself?
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 19:02:17
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] which contribution prefered - to gentoo or to project itself? by Eric Noack
1 On Sun, May 11, 2003 at 08:36:23PM +0200, Eric Noack wrote:
2 > however unfortunately i needed support for an isdn pcmcia card, and
3 > pcmcia-cs has no isdn support or drivers at all.
5 ):
7 >
8 > on the other side, adding the support to pcmcia_cs is as easy as copying a single driver file
9 > (something_cs.c) from linux/drivers/isdn/hisax/ into the pcmcia-cs source tree
10 > and add it to the make file, if only the kernel hisax driver has been compiled with support
11 > for the pcmcia chip
12 >
13 > (which is possible without enabling kernel pcmcia, only the carddriver itself
14 > cant be compiled without)
15 >
16 > so it would be easy to write a patch to pcmcia_cs that would check whether the kernel has
17 > isdn and hisax support, and which pcmcia-chip-protocols have been compiled into the hisax driver,
18 > and copy & compile the needed *_cs.c from the hisax dir
20 The check would definitely be good, but i'm hesitant to blindly copy
21 files over from /usr/src/linux (which may contain any bastardization of
22 the linux kernel with unknown patches, etc) and attempting to compile
23 it. i think it'd be better to push a packaged tarball to gentoo mirrors
24 that hold the necessary driver pieces. That way, we can test that things
25 actually work. If we copy over from /usr/src/linux, we have no way of
26 verifying things will work.
27 >
28 > however this "patch" could be completely provided by a modified ebuild, maybe with support for an
29 > "isdn" USEflag or such, too, eventually more easily than modifying the pcmcia_cs configure script
31 i definitely don't think this warrants a new USE flag, unless there's
32 quite a few more ebuilds that would benefit from it. As long as we can
33 verify that no compilation errors will occur, i see no problems with
34 doing this by default (given the above tests pass of course).
35 >
36 > so before writing this modification as either a patch to pcmcia_cs or the ebuild or both (ebuild that adds the patch)
37 If we have a seperate tarball, We can do the testing in the ebuild and
38 apply a patch to the pcmcia directory including the configure edit and
39 the new *_cs.c files.
41 also, i haven't scoured the pcmcia-cs m/l for this particular topic, but
42 does david hinds intend to add this support eventually?
44 chad, what do you think about this approach? any other ideas or
45 implementations you see as being superior?
47 -pete
49 --
50 Peter Johanson
51 <latexer@g.o>
53 --
54 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list