On Thu 20 Sep 2007 11:03, David McCullough pondered: > I would say that (a) is definately not the case. I am sure the BF guys > will say they have been banging us on the head with changes for a long > time and getting no where as we considered the changes to severe or out > of line.
I don't think we have been "banging heads" with you (unless that is your feeling?) - how about "working together, but diverting to satisfy different needs" :) I think that we have had more issues in the uClinux-dist (userspace and build environment), but for kernel code, we have moved from some non-standard (stupid) things we were doing early on to what we have today - which is as common/standard with other archs as we can be. Although this is slightly off topic - on the uClinux distribution side - most of our changes are based on requirements/desires from being able to support fdpic elf and flat formats, and to attempt to make things easier for end users/us to use/maintain. Where we do make changes - we always send the patch upstream and have the conversation with you (not everyone else does this), and some/most times rework things so they are more acceptable to you. We don't always come to an agreement - but we always have the discussion, and are willing to move if we can make things better that still meets both our needs/desires. > This particular patch was trivial in comparison to others I've seen, That is what we thought. > it fixed all the existing arches (not something that is always done) and > seemed a reasonable start to finally get the BF guys up and running. > Still, happy to make it better of course ;-) As always - we are more than happy to explore/review alternative patches if people want to write/sumbit them. -Robin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/