On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 05:15:21PM +0100, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
Jeff Mahoney wrote:
The issue as I see it is that we have no way to communicate to the user that the driver they're using is of dubious quality. In an ideal world, we could take the bug reports and fix the upstream driver. In reality, most of us don't have the time to tackle improving a driver for hardware we don't have.
Maybe the model of trying to put everything into a single giant repo needs to be reconsidered upstream already.
Um, really? The benifits of keeping the drivers/staging/ tree _in_ the main kernel tree are huge. There is no known advantage of keeping it out, and in fact, that's one of the main reasons I started doing this work. What do you feel would benifit by keeping this separate? How would the work flow happen? How would other distros and users be able to sync up properly?
So, what's the best way to communicate this to the user? Here's my list but I'm open to suggestions:
1) Move staging drivers to a separate package that isn't installed by default
You'd add the hw ids to the meta data for those packages nevertheless though. So the packages would get installed automatically anyways if the hardware is present.
2) Issue a warning during install or first driver load that the driver is of dubious quality 3) Use something like the flags we use in the SLE kernels to document a driver as supported or not to prevent the driver from being loaded without explicitly enabling it (preferably combined with #2)
A user space driver load/bind interceptor would be nice indeed.
What do you mean by this? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org