On 13 Feb 2003, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Agreed. But at the same time our code base is such that hardwaremain() > is not as fixed as it should be. Which means that without great care > things break.
I'm assuming hardwaremain is dead, although I will be sorry to see our very first linuxbios message go in the ashbin of history. :-) > Ron I don't know how to manage it but we need to setup a system where > we have releases of the core codebase. And one of the tasks of > doing a release need to be to review the changes that went in since > the last release so we can avoid things like a broken intel_chip_post > macro. Having code like that temporarily in CVS is fine. In the core > that is a pain. absolutely. Here is where my experience falls short. Do you have (or does anyone have) experience with managing this sort of thing? I agree that the tree has been moving pretty quickly. I would request the committers to use the RFC process to this list before making far-reaching changes. Any change that involves .inc or .S files is far-reaching, no matter how small it looks. ron _______________________________________________ Linuxbios mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
