[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#161931: kernel-image-2.4.19-k7: VESA driver for console


        I would like to add the dissenting opinion:
 Though I personally would probably include vesafb and fbcron in the
 kernel, I don't think I have heard strong enough arguments to justify
 overriding the maintainers judgment:
 a) Not every possible modules is included in even our modular
    kernels; people have to compile custom kernels for various
    hardware components
 b) Not all file systems are compiled into the kernel
 c) I do not see why vesafb users are special, and root on JFS people
    are not; why the former can't compile their own kerels, the latter
 d) Most users douse X,
 e) people can also use text consoles if they do not use X.

	I have not seen compelling arguments why one things vesa users
 are special, or indeed, numerous; not enough to convince me to
 substitute my own judgment over the person responsible for the
 package, and who does all the work for maintaining it. Historically,
 the debian developer has been allowed a fair degree of autonomy over
 their package; this is not really a technical problem, really, it is a
 judgment call; and I think we should strive not to override a
 developer unless we have more than gut feelings and opinions.

	For this reason, I hereby vote against the proposal. 

 In the same way that a wrongly handled blade of grass will cut one's
 hand, so a badly fulfilled life in religion will drag one down to
 hell. 311
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Attachment: pgpd_s6EAed5s.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: