2010/12/15 Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]> > On 12/15/2010 11:28 AM, Carsten Munk wrote: > >> 2010/12/15 Thomas B. Ruecker <[email protected] <mailto: >> [email protected]>> >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 09:47:33AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> > On 12/15/2010 9:26 AM, Thomas B. Ruecker wrote: >> >> Now at least Nokia for the N900 provides a much newer kernel >> for MeeGo, >> >>> so those of us who own N900's are in good shape, but the >> conflict I'm >> >>> trying to point out is real... and there will be a point >> where, even if >> >>> you ignore the hard compliance topic of what applications can >> expect, >> >>> the core OS just expects newer kernel functionality. >> >> Yes, we've seen this happen with previous hardware where we are >> stuck >> >> with 2.6.22 and a kernel config that clashes with newer udev. >> >> That's the moment where we either find a way to patch in the needed >> >> feature or say 'tough luck, no cookie for us'. It's not how it >> should >> >> be, yes. Newer kernel would be lovely, but often it won't happen. >> > >> > it's hard. Some of the more trivial things are easy to backport, but >> > once you start hitting whole subsystems or >> > core infrastructure you're going down fast. >> > >> > To run MeeGo 1.3, you will need things like full 2.6.37 level >> CGROUPS >> [...] snip >> OK, let's just for a second pretend we get the kernel issue solved. >> The beagle-board to my knowledge boots pretty much every bleeding-edge >> kernel. Did it help them when they asked for help? No, they just got >> yet another rulebook thrown at them. >> >> This is NOT encouraging community contributions on a hardware level. >> >> To translate this into blunt words it spells: >> >> "Do NOT come to MeeGo if you are not $BIGCORP with money to spend. >> GO AWAY WE DO NOT WANT YOU!" >> >> From my point of view that's just sad. >> >> >> I think this would be a good time to start discussing how really to get >> hardware adaptations into MeeGo in a practical manner and make it into a >> wiki guide.. >> >> Everything seems a bit ad-hoc regarding this area, so having some basic >> rules/procedures written down would be good.. but this may belong better on >> meego-port...@.. >> > > the whole point of this proposal is to make it EASIER to do such things by > officially allowing and blessing per board kernels! > Maybe that got missed in what the proposal is trying to do; it's officially > allowing per board kernels, within a few simple bounds > so that applications/etc can have some level of things to depend on. > > > Yes - I think the kernel policy is a big step ahead and benefiting HW adaptations hugely. Think it'll help a lot of issues and speed up development (wasn't arguing that)
Was just talking about to write some of the usual procedures onto wiki which is needed in order to get a hardware adaptation into MeeGo (not only kernel). BR Carsten Munk
_______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
