[RFC] merged void driver

[Luc Verhaegen]

On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 12:07:10PM -0500, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 05:17:31PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
> > 
> > Ignoring the rest of the email, and just singling out this one 
> > statement, which is mostly about describing the position from which i 
> > am looking at this situation, is also not too productive.
> 
> Yes, I could've replied to the entire mail, in which you restate
> everything you've previously said, and restated everything I've
> previously said (as well as everything Peter's previously said).  But
> what's the point?

You must be confusing this with some other discussion or mail-thread 
apparently.

Only the first and last statements in that email that you are supposed 
to be referring to are things i have been constantly hammering on. The 
things in between are actual counter-arguments/questions raised on the 
arguments stated in Peters previous email.

In the last statement i made, i wondered about the lack of defendable 
arguments. Your diversion is not exactly helping.

Luc Verhaegen.