From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: acpi.sourceforge.net DSDT collection - Get acpidumps for research Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:06:01 +0100 Message-ID: <20080418230601.GA10935@srcf.ucam.org> References: <1208540512.31815.74.camel@linux-2bdv.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mjg.x.mythic-beasts.com ([93.93.128.6]:40406 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751384AbYDRXGS (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Apr 2008 19:06:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1208540512.31815.74.camel@linux-2bdv.site> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Renninger Cc: linux-acpi , "Yu, Ling L" , Len Brown , tytso@MIT.EDU On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 07:41:52PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: > For vendors who want and will provide osi Vista SPX BIOS updates and > also want to reliably support Linux, they have to compile > osi="Linux Distribution I support" to return true into their Linux > kernels. Providing OSI only makes sense if we can commit to providing a stable interface. We can't make that commitment, so it makes no sense to provide it. If Suse are willing to make that commitment within a release, then go for it - but do bear in mind that it may restrict the bug fixes you can make. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org