Re: XFree86 update question
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 11:20:16PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
>
> > Would it be worthwhile to make ADB keycodes be available, and not
> > default? Is there ANY reason not to do this?
>
> yes there is a good reason NOT to do this. people should be able to
> use the debian kernel config as a reference when compiling thier own
> kernel from pristine sources, if debian goes screwing around with
> upstream defaults like this people will get a broken locally compiled
> kernel using the same .config as debian used. that is EVIL.
>
> if you want archaic, obsolete adb keycodes compile your own kernel
> and turn that option on, or use potato.
You're not thinking. Pristine source here means -WITH THE DEBIAN KERNEL
PATCH APPLIED-. Or from BitKeeper directly. If I do this, it will go
in to BitKeeper. If you try to use kernel.org kernels, you're shit out
of luck to start with.
> this discussion has already happened for ECN, its already been decided
> there that screwing with upstream runtime defaults is WRONG, and i
> agree with them.
No, the majority of the ECN argument rested on its presence as a
legitimate standard and an attempt to enforce that. For something
internal to any one system, that does not apply.
> there is no legitmate reason for not moving to linux keycodes, if you
> won't then compile your own kernel.
There is no legitimate reason to make people recompile their own
kernels when we can perfectly easily provide the functionality they
need.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Reply to: