Linus,
Please apply this to keep Andries happy, and correct a bug introduced
earlier during the geometry discussions that overlooked "small disks".
This applies directly against 2.2.1.
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Guest section DW wrote:
> Very good. That makes it all clear.
> Yes, it was painful, it hurt the eye, to see the changes made
> to the geometry code by our new IDE maintainer. By now it is
> clear that every single change was buggy.
>
> Andries
Andries,
If there is a personal issue that you have with me, please state clearly.
There is no such issue.
It is obvious that you don't agree with anything that I do, yet you chose
to not step up to the challenge. When the position was vacant, I waited
for anyone more qualified than me to step up. Since you somehow
determined that the task of being the 'IDE maintainer' was not suited to
your liking or ablities, someone had to do it.
No, I have no ambitions in that direction.
You feel my comments as a personal attack, and of course they can
be interpreted that way, but my concern is more with Linux.
If I see that someone's code is littered with bugs then I worry
about the kernel. Stating in public that this code is buggy
is a message to Linus and others: doublecheck IDE changes.
We had a very good and very stable IDE driver.
Sometimes I am afraid that it is as if Mark produced code that
is good in 99.998% of the cases, and Linus wanted 100% and now gets 99.8%.
But I may be entirely mistaken - I only looked at geometry stuff,
and clearly you did not know that part, but perhaps the remaining
IDE stuff is just fine.
Andries
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/