From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alan <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: RFC: removing the dgrs net driver
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 17:31:07 +0000
Message-ID: <20061202173107.47f609ca@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20061202171932.GP11084@stusta.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Nathanael Nerode <neroden@fastmail.fm>,
	Andres Salomon <dilinger@debian.org>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S1424259AbWLBR0Q@vger.kernel.org>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
In-Reply-To: <20061202171932.GP11084@stusta.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 18:19:32 +0100
Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:

> Based on the information in the email forwarded below I'd remove the 
> dgrs net driver (this wasn't the first driver shipped with the kernel 
> without any hardware ever produced...).
> 
> Is this OK or is there any doubt whether this information is true?

As I understand it a small number of such devices were produced, but I
have no objection to it going away. Even if someone had such a card it
would not actually be useful any more.

Alan