proski at gnu.org
Fri Apr 11 17:42:13 BST 2003
On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> Hm, you sure we really need CVS? Small patches / patchsets are easily kept
> without CVS; I don't want to accumulate large blacklogs of patches (what's
> in the queue right now is more than enough...); and for pushing changes to
> Linus BK seems to be a better choice. Or do you/dwmw have objections to BK? I'm
> currently testing BK for personal use... And what's your idea about this, Russell?
OK, I'll try to set up 2.5 kernel and bitkeeper this weekend. I don't
insist on CVS.
> Also, there's already a CVS repository at infradead.org for the
> "complete-rework" of PCMCIA. If we continue to improve PCMCIA by small
> upgrades this project which never really got off the ground might become
That's what I meant when I was talking about 4 files. For some reason I
was looking on SourceForge trying to find that project again. Stupid me.
> > For example, plx9052 can provide a 0x40 bytes long I/O window in the
> > region is already owns as a PCI resource. In my case, it's
> > 0xc000-0xc003f. pcnet_cs wants to get an I/O resource at 0x300.
0xc000-0xc03f, of course, sorry.
> /me fears indeed becoming the PCMCIA maintainer for 2.5... I have no idea if
> anybody else is considered being maintainer of orinoco, pcnet_cs and/or
> ide-cs. There are names mentioned in the pcmcia-cs package; but I think they
> are more or less unmaintained in their in-kernel incarnation. But maybe we
> can find this out looking at the changelog of Linus' tree?
I meant I'm ready to work on integration of those drivers into the 2.5
tree if we do further architectural changes and if the authors or
maintainers of those drivers don't have time or desire to update them.
More information about the linux-pcmcia