Jeremy Hall wrote: > > I appreciate the concerns you have regarding patching and doing work by > hand. Could some scripts be written to automate this process some? I > doubt I am the only one effected by this and would very much like to see > things continue they way they "are" with active development occurring in > both 2.4 and 2.6 code.
If you try to diff dvb-kernel with the drivers in Linux 2.6 you will see the problem. > I'm not trying to make more work for you, believe it or not I've still got > some applications that want the old API, and that definitely won't port to > 2.6, not to mention that I haven't performed any regression testing on 2.6 > with regards to latency. For this to occur without warning is more than > concerning to me. Has development of 2.7 begun yet? If not, can we > consider 2.6 stable enough to force people to move to it? I mentioned the plan to create this branch before on the list: http://www.linuxtv.org/mailinglists/linux-dvb/2004/02-2004/msg00687.html The DVB API has not changed and will not change for dvb-kernel. Please do not confuse this with the V4 API we are working on. In my experience Linux 2.6 is as stable as 2.4 (I'm using it for months now, since 2.6.0-test6 or so) -- with the exception of some of the drivers. Development happens in Andrew Morton's -mm tree, Linus will only merge tested patches into his tree. > Is it possible discussion could occur before making such a change? Too late. We must support sysfs/udev and request_firmware() for frontend drivers. This will need structural changes which are too much of a headache in a common 2.4/2.6 tree. Johannes -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.
