Hi Christoph, everyone,
> While Scott wrote most of the original code that ended up in the jsm
driver
> he's certainly not the maintainer in any sense.
Christoph, au contraire.
You might want to check with Wendy again, on who the maintainer
of the JSM driver code will be. =)
At any rate, I have
> I think you should supply a patch that makes the in-kernel driver print a
> short notice about your other driver. E.g.
>
> The foo driver is a stripped-down version of the bar driver. To get the
> additional configuration and diagnosis infrastructure, see the
> instructions on url.
>
N
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 11:27:44PM -0400, Ricky Beam wrote:
> As an outside observer, I think he's given you plenty of reason to not
> include this "hack". You, however, appear to only want to make a mess.
Why do you consider it a mess, and what reason did you see?
The jsm driver is an effort wh
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:30:19AM -0500, Kilau, Scott wrote:
>> However, when the copyright holder says "No, please don't add that
>> code",
>> and gives *GOOD* reasons why, you should respect that decision.
>
>You didn't not give a single good reason
Kilau, Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, neither IBM nor Digi wants this thread's patch to be applied,
> and yet Christoph wants to do it, completely out of spite, to break our
> out-of-tree open source driver.
>
> This is the problem that I have.
I think you should supply a patch that
On Tue, 2005-04-12 11:42:31 -0500, Kilau, Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The JSM driver was forced to be stripped down when being submitted
> to the kernel sources, and many extended features removed as so to be
> included into the kernel, as the extended features
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 04:46:10PM -0500, Kilau, Scott wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> The ball is in my court, because my wishes as a copyright holder are not
> being honored.
>
> Which is the right of Christoph because of the GPL, but it sure doesn't
> help the end
> users of said product.
> Your claim th
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:21:15PM -0500, Kilau, Scott wrote:
>
> However, neither IBM nor Digi wants this thread's patch to be applied,
> and yet Christoph wants to do it, completely out of spite, to break our
> out-of-tree open source driver.
>
> This is the problem that I have.
But that patch
Hi Matt,
The ball is in my court, because my wishes as a copyright holder are not
being honored.
Which is the right of Christoph because of the GPL, but it sure doesn't
help the end
users of said product.
Your claim that you are trying to "help" end users is bogus and just
plain wrong.
Period.
>
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:21:15PM -0500, Kilau, Scott wrote:
> Hi Greg, all,
>
> > Ok, but wasn't it possible to get those additional things added to the
> > main kernel serial core, which would then provide everything that
> Digi's
> > customers are accustomed to?
>
> Yes, it is my intention in
istoph Hellwig; Ihalainen Nickolay; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Wen Xiong
Subject: Re: Digi Neo 8: linux-2.6.12_r2 jsm driver
On Tue, 2005-04-12 11:42:31 -0500, Kilau, Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The JSM driver was forced
Hi Greg, all,
> Ok, but wasn't it possible to get those additional things added to the
> main kernel serial core, which would then provide everything that
Digi's
> customers are accustomed to?
Yes, it is my intention in the future to add support for the needed
information,
probably at the /sys le
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 11:54:04AM -0500, Kilau, Scott wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> > What features? Didn't we end up with a valid resolution to all of the
> > additional stuff in the jsm driver that you originally asked for? Why
> > not work on adding those new features to the serial core, and then
>
Hi Jan,
> But please be prepared to be in a competitive position. You've won't
get
> your driver included by just telling once about it; you'll need to
work
> towards that goal, and probably monitor the driver to be useable in
the
> future.
The JSM driver is a "stripped" down version of the DGNC
Hi Greg,
> What features? Didn't we end up with a valid resolution to all of the
> additional stuff in the jsm driver that you originally asked for? Why
> not work on adding those new features to the serial core, and then
there
> would be no issue with accepting your other driver?
I appreciate
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:30:19AM -0500, Kilau, Scott wrote:
> However, I am NOT willing to strip out many of the features our
> customers, (and as such, your USERS) want, which is what happened with
> the JSM driver.
What features? Didn't we end up with a valid resolution to all of the
addition
On Tue, 2005-04-12 10:30:19 -0500, Kilau, Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > There are people who just want the card supported. There's no reason
> > to deny the driver to them.
>
> Oh, it *is* supported, using our GPL'ed DGNC driver available on our
> ftp/web sit
> You didn't not give a single good reason. Only political bullshit.
How does "having more features" as a reason equal "political bullshit" ?
I am done with this thread, because I know continuing the flaming is
what you live for.
Do what you want, because I know you will.
However, again, I wan
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:30:19AM -0500, Kilau, Scott wrote:
> However, when the copyright holder says "No, please don't add that
> code",
> and gives *GOOD* reasons why, you should respect that decision.
You didn't not give a single good reason. Only political bullshit.
> So if I don't sign of
Wendy and I released under the GPL, and as such, I know legally you have
the right
to modify the code the way you see fit.
However, when the copyright holder says "No, please don't add that
code",
and gives *GOOD* reasons why, you should respect that decision.
So if I don't sign off on this chang
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 04:13:43PM +0400, Ihalainen Nickolay wrote:
Also the driver has changed a little in -mm, can you provide a diff
against that?
Sorry.
diff -up -r linux-2.6.12-rc2/drivers/serial/jsm/jsm_driver.c
linux-2.6.12-rc2-modified/drivers/serial/jsm/jsm_drive
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 09:55:10AM -0500, Kilau, Scott wrote:
> We (Digi) cares.
>
> We want people to use our DGNC driver over the JSM driver in all
> cases except the 2 port model of the board.
And we (kernel developers) don't care what drivers digi wants people
to use. We empower people to us
?
Scott
-Original Message-
From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 9:44 AM
To: Kilau, Scott
Cc: Ihalainen Nickolay; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Digi Neo 8: linux-2.6.12_r2 jsm driver
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 09
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 09:02:42AM -0500, Kilau, Scott wrote:
> LKML, please, do *NOT* apply this patch to the kernel!
> It will cause conflicts if our customers have both the Digi DGNC and
> IBM/Digi JSM drivers installed!
Who cares? If you're driver was written properly (which I hope for you)
i
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 04:13:43PM +0400, Ihalainen Nickolay wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I compile linux-2.6.12_r2 sources with jsm support, but Digi Neo 8 is
> unsupported.
> after some code-modifications it works fine.
The patch is badly mangled, please resend w
drivers installed!
Thanks!
Scott Kilau
-Original Message-
From: Ihalainen Nickolay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 7:14 AM
To: Kilau, Scott
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Digi Neo 8: linux-2.6.12_r2 jsm driver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I compile linux-2.6.12_r2 sources with jsm support, but Digi Neo 8 is
unsupported.
after some code-modifications it works fine.
lspci -v
:00:09.0 Serial controller: Digi International Digi Neo 8 (rev 02)
(prog-if 02 [16550])
~Subsystem: Digi
27 matches
Mail list logo
