[arch-dev-public] [signoff] kernel26-126.96.36.199-6
t.powa at gmx.de
Mon Mar 24 14:28:13 EDT 2008
Am Montag, 24. März 2008 schrieb Dan McGee:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Tobias Powalowski <t.powa at gmx.de> wrote:
> > > Am Montag, 24. März 2008 schrieb Dan McGee:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Tobias Powalowski <t.powa at gmx.de>
> > > > > Hi
> > > > > kernel bump release for both arches in
> > > > > testing, please signoff
> > > > > added atheros l2 network adapter support (used in eee pcs)
> > > >
> > > > What was wrong with AUR for this? Why on earth do we keep adding
> > > > MORE PATCHES!?
> > >
> > > more patches are so cool, you know ;)
> > > i hope one day you get new hardware and you are not able to get your
> > > network working, then i want to hear you scream.
> > I have an Eee, I managed to pull off an FTP install just fine.
> > I compiled the driver by hand, just as has always been the case for
> > out-of-tree driver with Arch if there is not already a separate
> > package for it.
> > I did this 22 months ago for my zd1211 wireless stick before it was in
> > the mainline kernel, and I had *0 days of desktop linux experience* at
> > that time (on my own machine). 0 days. And now we bend over backwards
> > for someone needing a driver? Ugh. I thought April fools and the
> > rename to Newb Linux wasn't for another week.
> I just want to say that I'm frustrated, so sorry for unleashing here-
> I mean what I say, but am really not trying to start some back and
> forth war that we aren't going to be able to make a decision on.
> 1) Did we even have a bug report for adding atl2? I saw a forum thread
> that suggested building it from the AUR, which seemed like a valid
Why do we always need bugreports?
I got the request on the 2008.03 ISO thread and read the patch site and
thought it's worth to add it.
> 2) atl2 is never going to make it upstream- I thought this was the
> criteria for adding a patch. Instead, an atlx driver is going to take
> the place of atl1/atl2. When did we change our patch inclusion
Probably it get replaced by such a driver in the future but not now in the .24
series and not in the .25 series.
> 3) You tell me in one thread that libarchive is too late, and two
> minutes later I see there is a new kernel that was probably made for
> the ISO. This confuses me.
> The communication and transparency here has had a HUGE breakdown.
If you would read the mail from yesterday evening there you should see what i
said needs to be signed off and moved for ISO creation/announcement and there
was no talk about libarchive.
glibc had a weird bug and klibc-kbd wrong depends that triggers a recreation,
along with this it was possible to add a new kernel package which supports
also atl2 network cards, so where is your problem?
Users are happy with the new ISOs, just read the Forum thread about it.
Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
tpowa at archlinux.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the arch-dev-public