> Sounds like a good idea to me. Why don't you do it and send
> patches?
Like I said, I *HAVE* done it - and discovered that NONE of those
three sets of options actually compiles. However, it was apparently a
wasted effort on my part since very few people have commented on my
suggestion...and NONE of the ones that matter bothered to...
As far as sending in patches is concerned, I've so far sent in TWO
different patches, both prior to trying the above out, and as far as I
can tell, neither has been accepted.
For reference:
1. My understanding was that the whole idea of having a kernel
configuration facility was to configure the kernel, so I sent
in a patch to add to the kernel configuration script a couple
of configuration options for settings that currently have to
be configured by editing the source directly.
The ONLY direct effect on the compiled kernel of adding this
patch to the sources is to potentially change two DATA bytes
in the table of possible serial ports, with no change to any
code whatsoever, so there is no realistic possibility of it
causing any bugs not already in the source.
The last I heard, this patch had been forwarded to the correct
maintainer since I misunderstood the submittal procedure. I'm
not sure who Alan forwarded it to, but I have heard nothing
from whoever it was.
2. I sent in a patch to correct a bug in the linux kernel version
of lxdialog, as used by the "make menuconfig" command. I have
had no indication that this has been applied, nor is there any
sign of it.
Perhaps somebody can correct the impression I get that any patches I
submit will be ignored, perhaps not - but I don't exactly feel
inclined to submit any further patches whilst that goes on. Even a
short note saying "I've received your patch, but am currently snowed
under" would be better than nothing...
Best wishes from Riley.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/