RE: [patch] fix parport_serial / serial link order (for 2.4.20-pr

[Ed Vance]

On Mon, September 30, 2002 at 2:49 AM, Russell King wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 10:40:12AM +0100, Tim Waugh wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 10:05:16PM +0200, Marek Michalkiewicz wrote:
> > > below is a patch that moves parport_serial.c from drivers/parport/
> > > to drivers/char/ - this fixes the wrong link order when the 
> > > drivers are compiled into the kernel.
> > 
> > What was wrong with the original, much smaller patch that you sent 
> > me previously (below)?
> > 
> > I'm happy to accept whichever patch is the better.
> 
> Other than it's a gross hack rather than a fix.  However, for 2.4, I
> think this is probably the best solution without creating a risk of
> other init ordering problems.  Ed, any comments?
> 
Hi Russell,

I agree. For 2.4, Stability before elegance. Minimum change is a good thing.
The patch looks straight-forward enough, simply plop the file into a
directory for which it was never intended. It does localize the effect of
the change nicely. 

I have a question. Similar changes have been suggested several times and
always seem to bring out a small hail of rather negative comments. (like
"gross hack ..." :) 

Are there any hidden issues with the patch? That is, beyond the decrease in
maintainability? I didn't see anything relevant to this technique in the
lkml archive. I'm a little wary of anything that gets an "oh no, not this
again" reaction. Hmmm... I think I hear the distant sound of arrows being
sharpened. 

Best regards,
Ed

---------------------------------------------------------------- 
Ed Vance              serial24 (at) macrolink (dot) com
Macrolink, Inc.       1500 N. Kellogg Dr  Anaheim, CA  92807
----------------------------------------------------------------