[LinuxPPS] ldattach?

[Udo van den Heuvel]

Udo van den Heuvel wrote:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123128405217529&w=2
> 
> drops the patch(!) and asks for Rodolfo. :-(
> Where is Rodolfo?
> Why is everyone asleep and 'discovers' this stuff now?

I do think that other programmers should step up now.
Rodolfo is not around (as it appears?).
And the work needs to get finished now.

Who can do any of the suggested changes?

 > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 12:43:00AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
 >
 > > linuxpps-core-support.patch
 >
 > looks generally good, but the comments should get a little loving.
 > Please remove the stupid filenames that always get out of sync in
 > the top of file comments, and make the documentation of exported
 > symbols kernel-doc instead of it's weird own format.
 >
 > Does checkpatch.pl still not catch these things?
 >
 > Also the ioctl certainly should be an unlocked_ioctl and not the
 > old BKL-locked variant. The !uarg checks in the ioctls can go,
 > copy_to/from_users does this automatically.
 >
 > pps.h shoulkd be split into one header only defining the
 > kernel<->userspace ABI, and a kernel-internal one.  That way
 > also the conditional includes can go away.
 >
 > > pps-documentation-programs-and-examples.patch
 >
 > Once again this stuff is in and utterly wrong place where it can't
 > easily be package for distros.  ppsfind belongs into util-linux and
 > needs a proper mangage, ppsldisc is not nessecary but ldattach in
 > util-linux needs to grow support for N_PPS instead, and ppstest
 > should probably go into util-linux in a more polished version, too.
 >
 > > pps-userland-header-file-for-pps-api.patch
 >
 > This one is utterly wrong.  It provides what should be a userspace
 > library as inlines in a kernel header.
 >
 > Please do a proper libpps library package.