On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 04:03:38PM -0700, Kok, Auke wrote:
 > Dave Jones wrote:
 > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 04:40:01PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
 > > 
 > >  > > In any case, this patch should not be merged. We often send it around 
 > > to users to
 > >  > > debug their issue in case it involves eeproms, but merging it will 
 > > just conceal
 > >  > > the real issue and all of a sudden a flood of people stop reporting 
 > > *real* issues
 > >  > > to us.
 > >  > 
 > >  > Sorry, I disagree.  Just as with e100, if there is a clear way the user 
 > >  > can recover their setup -- and Adam says his was effective -- I don't 
 > >  > see why we should be denying users the ability to use their own 
 > > hardware.
 > >  
 > > Indeed. This is a common enough problem that not including it causes more 
 > > pain
 > > than its worth.  I have two affected boxes myself that I actually thought
 > > the hardware was dead before I tried ajax's patch.
 > 
 > 
 > look: You should have reported this to us and you didn't. Now you are using 
 > the
 > fact that you did not report it as an argument which is out of place.

you're missing the point.  It looks like a hardware failure. Why would I report 
this? 

 > why do you say it is common? how often have you seen this and not reported 
 > it back
 > to our support? are you willingly trying to frustrate this issue?

Not at all. The only frustration here is that I used to have a kernel that
worked, upgraded, and thought that my hardware was broken.
How many other users thought the same ?

        Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to