[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

Raul Miller writes ("Re: Bug#161931: kernel-image-2.4.19-k7: VESA driver for console"):
> [details of proposal elided]
> I think this proposal matches the best information we have available
> and I vote for this proposal.

So, would everyone else please vote ?  If you don't have an opinion or
don't want to vote, please explicitly abstain.  That will shorten the
voting period due to the `no longer in doubt' rule.

I didn't say so earlier, but obviously I vote in favour of my
proposal too.  Here's another copy, in case you missed it:

 1. The Technical Committee has considered the question of whether
    VESA fb support should be compiled into the default kernel, as
    requested in Bug#161931.

 2. We have concluded that:
     * inclusion has significant benefits for some users, and
     * inclusion has no significant costs.
    Therefore, the VESA fb driver should be included.

 3. In particular, we have considered the following supposed downsides
    to including the driver in the distribution kernel:

  a. That the increase in kernel size (while not significant for just
    VESA fb) due to including all other non-modular drivers in a
    similar position, would be significant and perhaps problematic for
    boot floppies etc.

    This question is difficult to analyse conclusively, but we feel it
    is largely unsubstantiated.  If demand for many other similar
    drivers turns out to be similarly high, and including them is a
    problem, we are certainly prepared to make specific decisions in
    specific cases, and/or revisit VESA fb as part of a broader

  b. That the non-modularity of the VESA driver harms the kernel

    This is clearly relevant for a kernel architect, when choosing
    what drivers to include in a source tree.  However, we do not feel
    that it is relevant when - as distributors - we consider which
    drivers to enable or disable.

 4. Accordingly we request (or require, if the required supermajority
    is reached according to the Constitution) that the Debian kernel
    maintainers change the configuration to include the VESA fb driver
    in the default kernel, at their earliest convenience.


Reply to: