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

Re: Review request - PowerPC patches



Hi,

first of all, thanks for the feedback.  I'm posting my resulting
thoughts mainly for Sven as the co-maintainer, but others are welcome
to comment as well.

> airport.diff
> 
>  The latest orinoco now has monitor/scanning support in a way upstream
>  maintainers are okay with it.  So either drop this patch or replace it
>  with latest upstream.  Sooner or later we want this in the all debian
>  kernel packages, either via upstream or if that doesn't happen soon
>  by moving it to kernel-patch-debian.

I have just checked the latest version 0.15rc1 from orinoco.sf.net.
It adds a lot more than just monitor and scanning modes for already
supported hardware, so in my opinion it should indeed go either into
kernel-patch-debian or a completely separate package for the time
being.  Which means it's out of kernel-patch-powerpc.  It started as a
placeholder anyway, so little is lost.

> asfs.diff
> 
>  Should go upstream sooner or later but need works.  IMHO should be
>  dropped and made into kernel-patch-asfs

Fine with me.  I would suggest we keep it in the upcoming release, and
aim for an asfs source package building both a kernel-patch-asfs
package and a few modules packages in the immediate future.

> ksyms.diff
> 
>  Already upstream in 2.6.7-rc1

Yep, I saw this.  So it stays in 2.6.6 and goes in 2.6.7.

> pegasos.diff
> 
>  Arch/ppc part should go upstream, although upstream told me on irc they
>  remember they weren't happy with the last version they got, so it might
>  need work.

Right.  Since removing it would remove Pegasos support altogether, the
patch should stay.  Since it still needs work before it can propagate
upstream, it should lay as low as possible, which it is doing now.  So
it stays in kernel-patch-powerpc for the upcoming release.

> radeon-ibook.diff
> 
>  Ben promised to get this merged upstream soon.  Keep it until then.

Okay.

> serial.diff
> 
>  Shouldn't go upstream.  We need a better way to fix this issue.

So it stays where it is for the time being.

Regards, Jens.

-- 
J'qbpbe, le m'en fquz pe j'qbpbe!
Le veux aimeb et mqubib panz je pézqbpbe je djuz tqtaj!



Reply to: