Re: modem not responding

[Ben Dooks <ben-linux-arm@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 04:55:14PM +0530, Tushar wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 15:46, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 01:49:28PM +0530, Tushar wrote:
> > 

[snip]

> 	My point is that support for older kernel must not stop suddenly. Give
> people enough time to move to new kernel and have smooth transition. The
> best way to stop people using 2.4 kernel is to provide better
> alternative.      

It is not as if 2.6 has not been around for a long time, I have been tracking
it since 2.6.0, providing patches for my chosen SoC, as well as a few fixes
for the general ARM build.

see: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/search.php?uid=33


> > If you're being constrained to particular older kernel versions by your board
> > or device manufactures, why not put pressure on them to explain their
> > reasoning, and if you are a *paying customer* of them and their answer is
> > not satisfactory, consider taking your money elsewhere.
> 	The explanation is most often you will get it after some time. Wait
> till that time or start with what u have.

Maybe it is time to change vendors, after all, we can manage to keep track
of 2.6.

And here comes the rant:

A small number of us are making an effort to ensure 2.6 on the ARM is
integrated into the mainline kernel, which includes the following:

 - regular testing of the available kernels, including the
   release candidates (-rc) and the bitkeeper sub-releses
   (-rcX-bkY), which takes time and resources.

 - providing patches to fix any problems found, or help
   to the relevant maintainer to debug the problem if we
   cannot handle it ourselves

 - tracking the relevant mailing lists to ensure that any
   proposed changes are workable for ARM or our chosen 
   architectures. 

 - filling in the gaps for any drivers that are needed

For a few of us, this can also include the management of the
small team of developers who cluster around individual
architectures.

I'd like to make these observations about my experiences with
managing the s3c2410 and s3c2440 ports. 

Apart from a small group of developers who are actively interested,
there seems little other support forthcoming or even perceived gratitude.
When we mention 2.6, it gets dismissed out-of-hand (no reason given),
and thus another unit of patience is lost by the developers.

We'd like to think our hard work is being appreciated, which is why
we occasionally come down hard on the seemingly constant whining
that users seem to generate.

-- 
Ben

Q:      What's a light-year?
A:      One-third less calories than a regular year.


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscription options: http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm
FAQ/Etiquette:       http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/armlinux/mailinglists.php