ppc LE questions (seeking help hand info pointers)

Troy Benjegerdes hozer at drgw.net
Fri Sep 21 15:45:58 EST 2001

> question 4. assuming I was willing to deliver a clean, complete LE
> enabling patch (including devices that are relevant to me), as a compile
> time config option and maintain that patch, what would be the primary
> obstacle to inclusion in the main line.

I think the primary obstacle is that we already have enough problems
breaking obscure machines (embedded, or some old PReP box) whenever
something gets changed.

I suspect it's going to be a signifigant workload to keep a 'ppcle'
up-to-date, and most importantly, working.. you may be better off
maintaining a patch for LE support for the near future.

I for one, would like to see how small one could get a clean, working LE
patch for linux.

If the code isn't intrusive, and forces us to clean up abstraction layers
in headers and such, it could probably be a good thing.

This whole discusion is mostly academic and (in this case) somewhat
incendiary until someone shows up with working code.

My suggestion is go make it work, and if you find ways to clean up the
general PPC code in the process, this will definitely help.

Troy Benjegerdes | master of mispeeling | 'da hozer' |  hozer at drgw.net
-----"If this message isn't misspelled, I didn't write it" -- Me -----
"Why do musicians compose symphonies and poets write poems? They do it
because life wouldn't have any meaning for them if they didn't. That's
why I draw cartoons. It's my life." -- Charles Shulz

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list