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
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer