From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753854Ab0CFRmu (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Mar 2010 12:42:50 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:53682 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751532Ab0CFRmt (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Mar 2010 12:42:49 -0500 Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 09:40:18 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds X-X-Sender: torvalds@localhost.localdomain To: Sergio Monteiro Basto cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.sf.net Subject: Re: [git pull] drm request 3 In-Reply-To: <1267889034.24025.4.camel@segulix> Message-ID: References: <1267889034.24025.4.camel@segulix> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Sergio Monteiro Basto wrote: > > You shouldn't expect, by now, upgrade drm kernel without update libdrm > or at least recompile libdrm. Why? Why shouldn't I expect that? I already outlined exactly _how_ it could be done. Why are people saying that technology has to suck? > So when you saw a error message "driver nouveau 0.0.n+1 and have 0.0.n" > is completely right. No. It's _not_ right. The code knows what is wrong. Considering it a fatal error is _stupid_ and bad technology, when it could have just fixed it. > Is not a perfect world, but as talked on xorg mailing list, some time > ago, we do not have resources to test it in all versions. > Is better focus on just one combination. This is not about "testing all versions". It's fine to have just one combination. But why the hell doesn't it _load_ that one combination instead of just dying? IOW, there is a check for a version. It could - instead of dying - just dlopen() the right version instead. Why are people making excuses for bad programming and bad technology? Linus