Re: Question regarding naming scheme (HP Jornada 6XX/7XX)

[Kristoffer Ericson <kristoffer.ericson@gmail.com>]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:40:14 -0500
"Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Nov 25, 2007 11:30 PM, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 12:03:29AM +0100, Kristoffer Ericson wrote:
> >
> > > Why I want to use 600-series/700-series instead of 6XX/7XX is simply
> > > because 600-series/700-series leaves no doubt.
> > >
> > Apparently your end users are more technically apt than I am, as I have
> > no idea how using 00 over XX makes things any less ambiguous.
> >
> > We already have a 6xx mach-type that drivers can set their dependency on.
> > If it's not 680-only, then that's a perfectly reasonable dependency. Feel
> > free to change the Kconfig text to make the description more useful, but
> > please don't start idly shuffling around code and symbols because users
> > can't work out why a driver is available that they can't support.
> 
> Agreed. Users simply should not care what a particular module is
> called. If Kconfig entries and/or its help is unclear on whta devices
> are supported by the drivers let's fix that.
> 
Ok, guess the idea was shot down then :). I'll look at Kconfigs to see how I can make it clearer.
thx for feedback.

> -- 
> Dmitry