On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Rob Landley wrote:
> Well, you're maintainer and I'm obviously not, but it's nice to hear you've
> kept an open mind on this issue. :)
I have seen one version and I got physically sick.
> > All I want is the API rules to the signatures and we have them now.
> >
> > We do
On Wednesday 13 June 2001 03:06, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> No I would not take their code and apply it.
> I might not even want to look at it.
Well, you're maintainer and I'm obviously not, but it's nice to hear you've
kept an open mind on this issue. :)
> All I want is the API rules to the
Dear Mr. Craig Lyons,
> Hello,
>
> My name is Craig Lyons and I am the marketing manager at Promise Technology.
> We have a question and are hoping you can point us in the right direction.
> In the 2.4 kernel there is support for some of our products (Ultra 66, Ultra
> 100, etc.). As you may or
No I would not take their code and apply it.
I might not even want to look at it.
All I want is the API rules to the signatures and we have them now.
We do not need their driver.
Next insults to linux in this form are unacceptable means of
communication.
*
This support will also
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 11:22:56PM -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> I do not want or need your company's patches, period.
That's just not true and you know it. If the patches were to be written in
cooperation with you and of proper quality and license you would love them.
> I will not take or
Mr. Craig Lyons,
I do not want or need your company's patches, period.
I will not take or accept or approve of any dirty code that allows the a
poorly written binary driver that can not control its ISR and it
interferes irresponsiblily with the native ATA driver.
These are the words from your
Mr. Craig Lyons,
I do not want or need your company's patches, period.
I will not take or accept or approve of any dirty code that allows the a
poorly written binary driver that can not control its ISR and it
interferes irresponsiblily with the native ATA driver.
These are the words from your
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 11:22:56PM -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote:
I do not want or need your company's patches, period.
That's just not true and you know it. If the patches were to be written in
cooperation with you and of proper quality and license you would love them.
I will not take or
No I would not take their code and apply it.
I might not even want to look at it.
All I want is the API rules to the signatures and we have them now.
We do not need their driver.
Next insults to linux in this form are unacceptable means of
communication.
*
This support will also
Dear Mr. Craig Lyons,
Hello,
My name is Craig Lyons and I am the marketing manager at Promise Technology.
We have a question and are hoping you can point us in the right direction.
In the 2.4 kernel there is support for some of our products (Ultra 66, Ultra
100, etc.). As you may or may
On Wednesday 13 June 2001 03:06, Andre Hedrick wrote:
No I would not take their code and apply it.
I might not even want to look at it.
Well, you're maintainer and I'm obviously not, but it's nice to hear you've
kept an open mind on this issue. :)
All I want is the API rules to the
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Rob Landley wrote:
Well, you're maintainer and I'm obviously not, but it's nice to hear you've
kept an open mind on this issue. :)
I have seen one version and I got physically sick.
All I want is the API rules to the signatures and we have them now.
We do not need
12 matches
Mail list logo
