On 11/08/2010 09:41 AM, Luca Niccoli wrote:
> On 8 November 2010 13:18, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>        LINUX_FULL_VER=$(uname -r)
>>        LINUX_MINOR_MAYBE_XTRA=${LINUX_FULL_VER#*.}
>>        LINUX_MINOR_MAYBE_XTRA=${LINUX_MINOR_MAYBE_XTRA#*.}
>>        [ ${#LINUX_MINOR_MAYBE_XTRA} -le 5 ] || {
>>                slak=${LINUX_MINOR_MAYBE_XTRA#?????}
>>                LINUX_MINOR_MAYBE_XTRA=${LINUX_MINOR_MAYBE_XTRA%$slak}
>>        }
> 
> You're saying that you'd prefer this against:
> LINUX_MINOR_REV=`uname -r | cut -c 5,6`

The fix committed to git is fine.  I agree the alternative above is
atrocious (and hard to read, and if it's that complex and that
necessary, should be refactored so it can be used elsewhere instead of
copied all over the place ;)

So please, let's just move on?  We have to get everything cleaned up,
tested, and a freeze exception made ...  *That* is our priority.

Here are my unresolved issues for this branch:

1. hotkey duplicate events handling not 100% correct? (apparently not
really specific to this branch, but needs more testing in any case,
before release)

2. OSD goes away, impact on end-users (there's no visual feedback in
LXDE for volume anymore! arguably an LXDE issue that we don't need to
worry about, but something that concerns me, as we used to have this
with our old OSD and users are bound to complain)

Ben

_______________________________________________
Debian-eeepc-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/debian-eeepc-devel

Reply via email to