Subject: Re: Refactoring MI devices in GENERIC and friends
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Joerg Sonnenberger <email@example.com>
Date: 09/10/2007 05:58:52
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 04:43:06PM -0400, Allen Briggs wrote:
> None of the problems that I saw would be caught by a compile--only by
> trying to use the hardware. I don't have a real problem with including
> devices in a compile, but making the leap to "supported" or "expected
> to run" would be unconscionable.
I think this would be an even bigger reason to *include* them by
default. This is very likely to increase the exposure and a bug report
from someone that tried to run a driver and failed is better than the
reverse -- not getting the bug report even when the hardware is present.
> If we do include them, how do we communicate (amongst ourselves and with
> users) which drivers have been actually used successfully on a given
I would make a chart like the platform features (e.g. TC support). That
is better on www then in the actual source code though.