FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-14-2012, 11:20 PM
Dan McGee
 
Default Worthless out of tree kernel modules

Guys,

Why on earth are we maintaining any of the following?

* fcpci- pkgrel of 66
* fcpcmcia- pkgrel of 62
* slmodem- pkgrel of 62, not even available for x86_64

Frankly, if these can't make the cut to land in the kernel tree after
10 years, we are wasting our time packaging them. Might as well safe
the kernel packagers some headaches.

-Dan
 
Old 02-15-2012, 04:54 AM
Pierre Schmitz
 
Default Worthless out of tree kernel modules

Am 15.02.2012 01:20, schrieb Dan McGee:
> Guys,
>
> Why on earth are we maintaining any of the following?
>
> * fcpci- pkgrel of 66
> * fcpcmcia- pkgrel of 62
> * slmodem- pkgrel of 62, not even available for x86_64
>
> Frankly, if these can't make the cut to land in the kernel tree after
> 10 years, we are wasting our time packaging them. Might as well safe
> the kernel packagers some headaches.
>
> -Dan

They cannot land in the kernel because they are proprietary. Afaik
there are people working on a free driver for the fritz cards which will
also support capi; so these drivers might be replaceable by open source
ones some day.

--
Pierre Schmitz, http://pierre-schmitz.com
 
Old 02-15-2012, 06:23 AM
Tobias Powalowski
 
Default Worthless out of tree kernel modules

Am 15.02.2012 06:54, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
> Am 15.02.2012 01:20, schrieb Dan McGee:
>> Guys,
>>
>> Why on earth are we maintaining any of the following?
>>
>> * fcpci- pkgrel of 66
>> * fcpcmcia- pkgrel of 62
>> * slmodem- pkgrel of 62, not even available for x86_64
>>
>> Frankly, if these can't make the cut to land in the kernel tree after
>> 10 years, we are wasting our time packaging them. Might as well safe
>> the kernel packagers some headaches.
>>
>> -Dan
Only fcpci and fcpcmcia support capi2.0 which is needed for isdn hylafax
capability.
This can be dropped when the isdn userland tools will fully support
capi2.0 which is worked on for a while.
I'm happy if I don't need to build those anymore.
I guess this year they can finally die.

greetings
tpowa

--
Tobias Powalowski
Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
http://www.archlinux.org
tpowa@archlinux.org
 
Old 02-15-2012, 07:45 AM
Thomas Bächler
 
Default Worthless out of tree kernel modules

Am 15.02.2012 08:23, schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
> Am 15.02.2012 06:54, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
>> Am 15.02.2012 01:20, schrieb Dan McGee:
>>> Guys,
>>>
>>> Why on earth are we maintaining any of the following?
>>>
>>> * fcpci- pkgrel of 66
>>> * fcpcmcia- pkgrel of 62
>>> * slmodem- pkgrel of 62, not even available for x86_64
>>>
>>> Frankly, if these can't make the cut to land in the kernel tree after
>>> 10 years, we are wasting our time packaging them. Might as well safe
>>> the kernel packagers some headaches.
>>>
>>> -Dan
> Only fcpci and fcpcmcia support capi2.0 which is needed for isdn hylafax
> capability.
> This can be dropped when the isdn userland tools will fully support
> capi2.0 which is worked on for a while.
> I'm happy if I don't need to build those anymore.
> I guess this year they can finally die.

What about slmodem then? I doubt anyone actually uses that.
 
Old 02-15-2012, 07:55 AM
Pierre Schmitz
 
Default Worthless out of tree kernel modules

Am 15.02.2012 09:45, schrieb Thomas Bächler:
> Am 15.02.2012 08:23, schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
>> Am 15.02.2012 06:54, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
>>> Am 15.02.2012 01:20, schrieb Dan McGee:
>>>> Guys,
>>>>
>>>> Why on earth are we maintaining any of the following?
>>>>
>>>> * fcpci- pkgrel of 66
>>>> * fcpcmcia- pkgrel of 62
>>>> * slmodem- pkgrel of 62, not even available for x86_64
>>>>
>>>> Frankly, if these can't make the cut to land in the kernel tree after
>>>> 10 years, we are wasting our time packaging them. Might as well safe
>>>> the kernel packagers some headaches.
>>>>
>>>> -Dan
>> Only fcpci and fcpcmcia support capi2.0 which is needed for isdn hylafax
>> capability.
>> This can be dropped when the isdn userland tools will fully support
>> capi2.0 which is worked on for a while.
>> I'm happy if I don't need to build those anymore.
>> I guess this year they can finally die.
>
> What about slmodem then? I doubt anyone actually uses that.

Looking at the pkgbuild makes me cry; I also wonder why we use a
version from 2008 with patches when there is a new one from 2011. But
anyway, usage of that package is below a measurable threshold.

But in general I don't care that much as long as people maintain these.
Dropping useless orphaned packages is fine though.

--
Pierre Schmitz, http://pierre-schmitz.com
 
Old 02-15-2012, 12:08 PM
Dan McGee
 
Default Worthless out of tree kernel modules

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:55 AM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
> Am 15.02.2012 09:45, schrieb Thomas Bächler:
>> Am 15.02.2012 08:23, schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
>>> Am 15.02.2012 06:54, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
>>>> Am 15.02.2012 01:20, schrieb Dan McGee:
>>>>> Guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> Why on earth are we maintaining any of the following?
>>>>>
>>>>> * fcpci- pkgrel of 66
>>>>> * fcpcmcia- pkgrel of 62
>>>>> * slmodem- pkgrel of 62, not even available for x86_64
>>>>>
>>>>> Frankly, if these can't make the cut to land in the kernel tree after
>>>>> 10 years, we are wasting our time packaging them. Might as well safe
>>>>> the kernel packagers some headaches.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Dan
>>> Only fcpci and fcpcmcia support capi2.0 which is needed for isdn hylafax
>>> capability.
>>> This can be dropped when the isdn userland tools will fully support
>>> capi2.0 which is worked on for a while.
>>> I'm happy if I don't need to build those anymore.
>>> I guess this year they can finally die.
>>
>> What about slmodem then? I doubt anyone actually uses that.
>
> Looking at the pkgbuild makes me cry; I also wonder why we use a
> version from 2008 with patches when there is a new one from 2011. But
> anyway, usage of that package is below a measurable threshold.
>
> But in general I don't care that much as long as people maintain these.
> Dropping useless orphaned packages is fine though.

Mainly it was a "I can't believe anyone still uses this" question, and
trying to save our kernel maintainers some work that isn't necessary,
that's all.

-Dan
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:35 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org