How Linux Supports More Devices Than Any Other OS, Ever (O'Reilly)
How Linux Supports More Devices Than Any Other OS, Ever (O'Reilly)
Posted Nov 3, 2008 22:20 UTC (Mon) by JoeF (guest, #4486)In reply to: How Linux Supports More Devices Than Any Other OS, Ever (O'Reilly) by avik
Parent article: How Linux Supports More Devices Than Any Other OS, Ever (O'Reilly)
That's a relatively short definition of 'forever'.
Indeed.
In my case, there are still people who have cards with the chip in question, I have submitted a patch, but even so, the V4L maintainers apparently don't care...
Posted Nov 4, 2008 14:00 UTC (Tue)
by nhippi (subscriber, #34640)
[Link] (4 responses)
Looking at that thread, you were just not persistent enough. It's not really fair to complain that others don't care when you don't seemingly care enough to keep reposting the patch/driver to v4l list until you get a reaction out of them ;)
If the subsystem maintainer is not reacting your patches, ask others for help. Greg's Linux Driver Project or linux-staging are good places to start at. If you feel your patch is already in good condition, you can ask Andrew Morton to include it in his tree.
Posted Nov 4, 2008 16:43 UTC (Tue)
by JoeF (guest, #4486)
[Link]
Posted Nov 4, 2008 17:14 UTC (Tue)
by JoeF (guest, #4486)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Nov 5, 2008 10:18 UTC (Wed)
by nhippi (subscriber, #34640)
[Link] (1 responses)
from the original thread:
- already been marked as BROKEN in 2.6.0 three years ago and
Without warning eh?
> Here, I was really just commenting on Greg's claim that Linux keeps drivers forever, which clearly isn't true.
Well lets refine that. Linux keeps any driver forever, as long there is atleast one person who finds enough time at least once in three years to keep the driver functioning ;)
Vendors have a clear interest to write drivers for their current hardware, but for legacy drivers Linux depends on volunteers on their limited free time. The mythical "someone else" has her own itches to scratch, and unless you are very lucky, it isn't "cleaning up drivers for esoteric hardware I don't own".
Posted Nov 5, 2008 15:56 UTC (Wed)
by JoeF (guest, #4486)
[Link]
Well lets refine that. Linux keeps any driver forever, as long there is atleast one person who finds enough time at least once in three years to keep the driver functioning ;)
I did. I originally submitted my patches to the person listed as maintainer of the code.
How Linux Supports More Devices Than Any Other OS, Ever (O'Reilly)
How Linux Supports More Devices Than Any Other OS, Ever (O'Reilly)
I have neither the time nor the inclination to play all the political games to get something included in the kernel. I play with the kernel in my limited spare time...
Here, I was really just commenting on Greg's claim that Linux keeps drivers forever, which clearly isn't true.
How Linux Supports More Devices Than Any Other OS, Ever (O'Reilly)
Cleaning it up I could have understood, but taking it out? And pretty much without warning. A simple question on the V4L list like "anybody still using this" would have helped. Indeed, there have been such questions before, and I had chimed in at that point.
How Linux Supports More Devices Than Any Other OS, Ever (O'Reilly)
- is still marked as BROKEN.
As I mentioned, I had sent my patches to the maintainer, which I think is the right thing to do.How Linux Supports More Devices Than Any Other OS, Ever (O'Reilly)
Now, the *maintainer* was the person who didn't maintain the code anymore.
And it *was* known to the V4L list that there are people who still use this chip.
There was *no* communication on the list about "we want to remove this, unless somebody is fixing it". So, I maintain that the *removal* came without warning.