why is a patch still needed?

why is a patch still needed?

[Justin Karneges]

Hi,

I've been watching this project for nearly two years, and I'm surprised that 
patches are still offered on your website.  I thought by now ACPI would be a 
standard part of Linux, at least in 2.6.  Interestingly enough, the vanilla 
kernel does have ACPI support.  How is this different from your code?

I've seen many kernel extension websites eventually say something like "no 
more separate downloads necessary, just get the latest kernel", but yours 
does not yet say that.  Is this on the agenda?

Sorry if this is a dumb question. :)

-Justin


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click

Re: why is a patch still needed?

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 12:44:49AM -0800, Justin Karneges wrote:
> I've seen many kernel extension websites eventually say something like "no 
> more separate downloads necessary, just get the latest kernel", but yours 
> does not yet say that.  Is this on the agenda?

ACPI is constantly being developed.  It's a large and complex
specification.  As a result BIOS writers get things wrong, and the
ACPICA has missing bits and bugs.  So there will probably always be an
ACPI patch, just like there's always a netdrivers patch and always a
scsi patch.

-- 
"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon 
the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those
conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse
to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince 
himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep 
he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." -- Mark Twain


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click

Re: why is a patch still needed?

[Justin Karneges]

On Tuesday 23 March 2004 4:33 am, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 12:44:49AM -0800, Justin Karneges wrote:
> > I've seen many kernel extension websites eventually say something like
> > "no more separate downloads necessary, just get the latest kernel", but
> > yours does not yet say that.  Is this on the agenda?
>
> ACPI is constantly being developed.  It's a large and complex
> specification.  As a result BIOS writers get things wrong, and the
> ACPICA has missing bits and bugs.  So there will probably always be an
> ACPI patch, just like there's always a netdrivers patch and always a
> scsi patch.

Are these patches eventually integrated into the kernel?  And their 
availability on a separate website is there for people who don't want to wait 
for the next kernel release?  In other words, if I wait until kernel 2.6.5, 
do I get the ACPI stuff offered on your website today?

-Justin


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click

Re: why is a patch still needed?

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 11:34:13AM -0800, Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 March 2004 4:33 am, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > ACPI is constantly being developed.  It's a large and complex
> > specification.  As a result BIOS writers get things wrong, and the
> > ACPICA has missing bits and bugs.  So there will probably always be an
> > ACPI patch, just like there's always a netdrivers patch and always a
> > scsi patch.
> 
> Are these patches eventually integrated into the kernel?  And their 
> availability on a separate website is there for people who don't want to wait 
> for the next kernel release?  In other words, if I wait until kernel 2.6.5, 
> do I get the ACPI stuff offered on your website today?

As you'd know if you looked in the archives of this mailing list,
the ACPI tree is merged into Linus' tree on a regular basis.

-- 
"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon 
the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those
conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse
to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince 
himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep 
he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." -- Mark Twain


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click

Re: why is a patch still needed?

[Justin Karneges]

On Tuesday 23 March 2004 11:39 am, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> As you'd know if you looked in the archives of this mailing list,
> the ACPI tree is merged into Linus' tree on a regular basis.

Thanks for the answer.  Apologies for not searching the archives, I've found 
the SF interface doesn't easily allow for that...

About how far behind is the actual kernel vs the patches here?  For instance, 
if 2.4.26-pre5 with today's ACPI patch functions properly for me, would it be 
safe to say that I would not need a patch with 2.4.27?

-Justin


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click

Re: why is a patch still needed?

[Len Brown]

On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 18:48, Justin Karneges wrote:

> Thanks for the answer.  Apologies for not searching the archives, I've found 
> the SF interface doesn't easily allow for that...

try this one:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=acpi4linux

> About how far behind is the actual kernel vs the patches here?

Lately it has been under 10 days -- but this varies with the phase of
the release cycle.

>   For instance, 
> if 2.4.26-pre5 with today's ACPI patch functions properly for me, would it be 
> safe to say that I would not need a patch with 2.4.27?

yes, unless something breaks, or you discover that what you think is
working properly isn't really working properly...

-Len




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click