Post by Artturi Alm
The person didn't make a simple config change they made
a change to the actual kernal code.
thank you for your reply, but that's no answer to my question, and
you have no sense for my lack of humour it seems.
the Huge difference is between kernel and kernal code, now have you used
config to make changes to usar code? you should test the diff i sent, if
There are a spectrum of possible changes that someone may make from
inconsequential to forked project. Your diff made running config(8)
emit a warning even if the user had made *no* changes to a provided
GENERIC config, effectively claiming that we deny support if they
don't ship a kernel theo builds, but that is *not* the case. Indeed,
we provide errata including kernel patches for the last couple
releases. We are not that dogmatic.
What's we're saying is that while many changes have no effect on
support or will be gladly merged into the base in some form, other
changes go beyond what the project can or will support. There is no
easily stated rule for this and the effective rule changes in various
ways as our understanding changes and as the world changes. For
example, a year ago changes that would fail on static-lib-only archs
would not be accepted; now they are. Theo is saying that the world
and the project will need to change in many, many ways before
Sébastien's diff would be supported and we don't see that happening in
the foreseeable future.