speedtch cxacru2.c, NONE, 1.1 cxacru2.h, NONE, 1.1
speedtch2.c, NONE, 1.1 speedtch2.h, NONE, 1.1 usbatm2.c, NONE, 1.1
Makefile, 1.8, 1.9 usbatm.c, 1.1, NONE
David Woodhouse
dwmw2 at infradead.org
Fri Jan 21 09:55:47 EST 2005
- Previous message: speedtch cxacru2.c, NONE, 1.1 cxacru2.h, NONE, 1.1 speedtch2.c,
NONE, 1.1 speedtch2.h, NONE, 1.1 usbatm2.c, NONE, 1.1 Makefile,
1.8, 1.9 usbatm.c, 1.1, NONE
- Next message: speedtch cxacru2.c, NONE, 1.1 cxacru2.h, NONE, 1.1 speedtch2.c,
NONE, 1.1 speedtch2.h, NONE, 1.1 usbatm2.c, NONE, 1.1 Makefile, 1.8,
1.9 usbatm.c, 1.1, NONE
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
On Thu, 2005-01-20 at 21:30 +0100, Duncan Sands wrote:
> > Sorry for asking again, but what does it buy you?
>
> I will answer this (and your previous mail) later. For now, I would
> prefer to just work on it.
FWIW I'm with Roman on this one. We had a library which was available
for the hardware-specific drivers to use as appropriate. Now AFAICT we
have a single monolithic driver module which optionally contains support
for various different types of hardware. That seems like a step
backwards to me.
--
dwmw2
- Previous message: speedtch cxacru2.c, NONE, 1.1 cxacru2.h, NONE, 1.1 speedtch2.c,
NONE, 1.1 speedtch2.h, NONE, 1.1 usbatm2.c, NONE, 1.1 Makefile,
1.8, 1.9 usbatm.c, 1.1, NONE
- Next message: speedtch cxacru2.c, NONE, 1.1 cxacru2.h, NONE, 1.1 speedtch2.c,
NONE, 1.1 speedtch2.h, NONE, 1.1 usbatm2.c, NONE, 1.1 Makefile, 1.8,
1.9 usbatm.c, 1.1, NONE
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
More information about the Usbatm
mailing list