In message [off-list ref] you wrote:
quoted
Sorry, this is one of our patches that never was accepted for the
official source trees (also including hardware flow control).
... because you never split things out into logical chunks which make
life easier on people trying to understand what changed and why. Our
last merge went well I thought, and I'm up for another round if you are.
It would be too much trouble to separate the hardware flow control
stuff from the other port configuration options. I feel it should be
sufficient to have a set of changes local to one single source file.
You say it is not sufficent. OK. You are the maintainer, I ain't.
It's your decision, and I won't discuss it.
Wolfgang Denk
--
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd@denx.de
"Most people would like to be delivered from temptation but would
like it to keep in touch." - Robert Orben
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 01:03:30AM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message [off-list ref] you wrote:
quoted
quoted
Sorry, this is one of our patches that never was accepted for the
official source trees (also including hardware flow control).
... because you never split things out into logical chunks which make
life easier on people trying to understand what changed and why. Our
last merge went well I thought, and I'm up for another round if you are.
It would be too much trouble to separate the hardware flow control
stuff from the other port configuration options. I feel it should be
sufficient to have a set of changes local to one single source file.
If you're referring to the very configurable SCC portion, as far as I
know, no one, including yourself has made a verion which satisifes all
of the people all of the time, which is why Dan hasn't approved any of
the patches to do that. But maybe the 2.5 config language will
allow someone to write it in a manner which lets everyone do what they
want..
But, it's been a while, so if it's not too much trouble, can you send it
out again?
You say it is not sufficent. OK. You are the maintainer, I ain't.
Dan Malek is really, I just try and help him when I can. :)
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/