From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx51.mymxserver.com ([85.199.173.110]:15783 "EHLO mx51.mymxserver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754841AbZJZIEk (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Oct 2009 04:04:40 -0400 From: Holger Schurig To: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/19] [RFC, v2] libertas: Kconfig entry for libertas+cfg80211 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:04:12 +0100 Cc: Dan Williams , Johannes Berg , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, John Linville References: <20091022133043.185554096@mail.mn-solutions.de> <1256315415.2164.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20091025033853.GA25873@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20091025033853.GA25873@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200910260904.12417.hs4233@mail.mn-solutions.de> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > How much does mesh actually get used? AFAICS it's a > OLPC-specific one off. A good question, I don't know no-one that uses mesh outside of OLPC. > So unless OLPC people come up and fix it why do people even > bother with it? In some way the OLPC people won't be bothered, they don't follow linux-git or linux-wireless, they are stuck to some old kernel (2.6.25 AFAIK). So they don't even notice :-) However, they need MESH, so if I now rip MESH out completely just because I change some configuration API, that would bring more burden to them. -- http://www.holgerschurig.de