From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: should we remove cpqfc from the Linux 2.6 tree?
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 16:29:29 +0200
Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <20040920142929.GA26331@lst.de>
References: <D4CFB69C345C394284E4B78B876C1CF107DBFD96@cceexc23.americas.cpqcorp.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:61388 "EHLO mail.lst.de")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266613AbUITO3w (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 20 Sep 2004 10:29:52 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <D4CFB69C345C394284E4B78B876C1CF107DBFD96@cceexc23.americas.cpqcorp.net>
List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
To: "Miller, Mike (OS Dev)" <mike.miller@hp.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, "Kantharia, Chirag (STSD)" <chirag.kantharia@hp.com>, mkp@mkp.net, ISS StorageDev <iss_storagedev@hp.com>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 09:24:26AM -0500, Miller, Mike (OS Dev) wrote:
> HP agrees with the recommendation to remove cpqfc from the tree until it can be fully 2.6 compliant.

Does this mean HP is still supporting the driver and has plan to
resurrect the 2.6 version?