Re: CONFIG_PNP: Please change the name

Andrew Mileski (dmtech@magi.com)
Sun, 17 Mar 1996 18:26:58 -0500 (EST)

>> Don't pin judgement on the Linux project when you're using an
>> INFERIOR Plug-and-Play implementation on a lame OS like Windows95
>> or DOS.
>>
>> But *DO* voice your opinions on what you *WANT* the Linux
>> implementation to do/not do. I'm *ALWAYS* open for suggestions.
>>
>If you read the chain my response was to a hardware developer
>who solicited questions about the pitfalls of PnP at the time
>I had the problems Linux did not have PnP, and your implementation
>may work the majority of the time but I do not believe you are
>an all knowing being and I am sure that problems will be found.

I apologize if I offended - it was not at all intentional.

My intent was to LET THE WORLD EXACTLY exactly what you stated
above, as I realized it too (I *did* follow the thread and read
everything).

It seems not everyone out there was getting the complete
picture.

ALL: General discussion on PnP should likely be taken to the
PnP list (see http://www.redhat.com/pnp/).

Thanks for the comments!

-- Andrew E. Mileski --
--------------------------------------------------------------
mailto:dmtech@magi.com http://www.redhat.com/~aem/
"The best programmers are lazy", so I'm told.
I haven't gotten around to seeing if it is true or not though.