From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: add "auto" to acpi_enforce_resources Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 14:27:40 +0100 Message-ID: <20090227132740.GF1482@ucw.cz> References: <20090204060513.GA28321@srcf.ucam.org> <498953DF.5050306@redhat.com> <20090204131708.GA2739@srcf.ucam.org> <20090204142606.1823661b@hyperion.delvare> <20090204142015.GB3923@srcf.ucam.org> <20090210145716.105ab58b@hyperion.delvare> <20090210140829.GA25397@srcf.ucam.org> <49919E08.5050002@redhat.com> <20090210172408.400cacee@hyperion.delvare> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:44536 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757341AbZB0N1s (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2009 08:27:48 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090210172408.400cacee@hyperion.delvare> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Jean Delvare Cc: Hans de Goede , Matthew Garrett , Len Brown , Luca Tettamanti , Thomas Renninger , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > For the record we have changed the default to strict in Fedora's > > development branch, for 2 weeks or so now, including in the recently > > released Fedora 11 release and we've had 0 complaints so far. > > Well, if the number of affected systems is small, this is good news. > But this is only 2 weeks and one distribution, coverage isn't > sufficient to claim anything yet IMHO. > > That being said... if there's a common consensus that switching to > strict and dealing with fallouts is the best thing to do, and I'm the > only one objecting to this, then I am ready to admit that I was wrong > and let you proceed. I believe that 'enable strict, deal with fallout' is the best long-term strategy... Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html