Re: [patch 2/2] [PATCH 2/2] ACPI: generic initramfs table override support #3

["Leo \"costela\" Antunes" <costela@debian.org>]

Matthew Garrett wrote:
> I'm really unenthusiastic about this. The majority of use cases appear 
> to be people working around Linux bugs and never reporting the bugs to 
> us, leaving everybody worse off.

I can't judge the technical quality of the patch, but I don't think the
social side of it is a problem (assuming I correctly understood the
change in question).

Case in point: I reported a problem[0] with the thermal/fan subsystems
which was left unanswered and forced me to recompile kernels with
overridden DSDTs for every new release expecting a fix and eventually
replace the laptop in question. I'm obviously not demanding that my
problem be solved, but the point is that not all problems can be solved
in a timely fashion even when they are reported (for whatever reason:
lack of manpower, lack of test machines, etc), so avoiding this change
which could ease the testing of new DSDTs seems a bit sadistic. :)

Another point of view to the same argument is that the current situation
doesn't guarantee feedback either. The added hassle of needing a
recompile doesn't IMHO necessarily mean users report these sort of problems.

Just my technically inapt 0,2 €. :)

Cheers

[0] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.acpi.devel/37612

-- 
Leo "costela" Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html