Darren, V ?t, 08. 07. 2008 v 16:05, Darren J Moffat p??e: > Milan Jurik wrote: > > Because many modules in ON (and not only in ON) are in one file, it's > > usefull in many cases. Yes, it's not reliable but it's better than > > nothing. So, if we are removing %I%, we should find some better, generic > > mechanism for it. > > This was already discussed on this alias and internally at Sun too and > the consensus was that a replacement was not needed. Please respect the > consensus or provide a proposal that will work reliably in the single > and multiple files cases. >
I respect it but I can complain, can't I? I'm sorry, I haven't time to follow all discussions in all interesting lists, it's only for my spare time. > Note that even modules that are only a single file import header files > and a change in a header file can be just as significant - if not more - > than a change in the modules own .c file. See the recent issues with > ioctl mask as a perfect example of this. > Yes, of course. I wrote "Yes, it's not reliable but it's better than nothing." > > And as example where it helped, look at CR 6704883 > > The module version isn't just %I% in this case it appears to be > "v20080115-1.49". > Yes, it uses also other sccs keywords. > I'm not disputing that there have ever been cases where it helped but > other methods that have been discussed in this thread can help too and > are actually more reliable. > > The solution should also be generic and not specific to kernel modules. > Yes, I agree. But I don't see that generic better solution spreading around gates. Best regards, Milan
