Andrew Sayers ha scritto: >> What I'd like to raise - how does one write such a database, when there >> is no clear-cut answer on whether this card, with this driver, works? > > Since we're talking about regressions here, one solution would be to > make downgrading as easy as upgrading, and to request an optional > hardware profile immediately before a user up/downgrades.
That you can't do for your life: in feisty, my hardware works (well, don't know about the webcam, actually). But at office, I have hardy, and I use lyx from there. The version of lyx in feisty will not read the files I produce at office. Indeed, there are plenty of bugfixes which are not regressions, and I couldn't stick with feisty forever. What I can do, is to install feisty and use it when I really need it. But for a network card it isn't that simple as you can imagine. The point raised by Sarah, how do you organise such a database and how can you be "boolean" in saying that something does not work, is an extremely good question. I need to think about it and see if I can suggest a solution or not. A "quantitative" yet simple answer is that by looking at launchpad I can immediately tell that "iwl3945 drivers suck" :) But this does not solve the problem of creating a good hardware support database, which seems to be quantitative rather than boolean in many cases. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
