From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rene Herman Subject: Re: LMSENSORS: 2.6.26-rc, enabling ACPI Termal Zone support costs sensors Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:24:06 +0200 Message-ID: <485F79C6.20507@keyaccess.nl> References: <485DA11C.7050906@keyaccess.nl> <485DFF35.6080008@hhs.nl> <485E505F.8010306@keyaccess.nl> <485E61DE.6020202@hhs.nl> <20080623120844.5f722aa6@hyperion.delvare> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtpq1.groni1.gr.home.nl ([213.51.130.200]:47614 "EHLO smtpq1.groni1.gr.home.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752729AbYFWKX1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jun 2008 06:23:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080623120844.5f722aa6@hyperion.delvare> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Jean Delvare Cc: Hans de Goede , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Zhang Rui , "Mark M. Hoffman" , Linux Kernel , lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org On 23-06-08 12:08, Jean Delvare wrote: > No, the kernel does the right thing and does not need to be modified > at all. No Jean, this is totally unacceptable. No matter how you want to call things, 2.6.26 is going to break important functionality on millions of systems and you simply do not get to do that. Can you comment on the last patch posted? It's trivial: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/22/243 Rene. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rene Herman Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 10:24:06 +0000 Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] LMSENSORS: 2.6.26-rc, Message-Id: <485F79C6.20507@keyaccess.nl> List-Id: References: <485DA11C.7050906@keyaccess.nl> <485DFF35.6080008@hhs.nl> <485E505F.8010306@keyaccess.nl> <485E61DE.6020202@hhs.nl> <20080623120844.5f722aa6@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20080623120844.5f722aa6@hyperion.delvare> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jean Delvare Cc: Hans de Goede , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Zhang Rui , "Mark M. Hoffman" , Linux Kernel , lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org On 23-06-08 12:08, Jean Delvare wrote: > No, the kernel does the right thing and does not need to be modified > at all. No Jean, this is totally unacceptable. No matter how you want to call things, 2.6.26 is going to break important functionality on millions of systems and you simply do not get to do that. Can you comment on the last patch posted? It's trivial: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/22/243 Rene. _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors