Re: [git pull] drm request 3
From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Thu Mar 04 2010 - 14:14:55 EST
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> If you'd made it clear that you wanted the interface to be stable
> before it got merged, I suspect that it simply wouldn't have been merged
> until the interface was stable.
What kind of excuse is that? It's "we did bad things, but if we didn't do
those bad things, we'd have done _other_ bad things"?
Two wrong choices don't make a right.
Nobody has even answered me whether this is _forwards_compatible. It
clearly isn't backwards-compatible. IOW, is there _any_ way to move
back-and-forth over that commit, even if I can find a new libdrm?
IOW, we know we have a problem here. But what's the solution? I know I can
revert it (I tried, I'm running that kernel now, nouveau works). That's
not a good solution, I know. But can you offer me a _better_ one? One that
doesn't involve "upgrade all the way to rawhide, and lose the ability to
bisect anything, or run plain 2.6.33".
So yes, I'm complaining. But I at least have mentioned one solution. You,
in contast, are just making excuses with no solutions.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/