On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 06:47:13PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
On 2009-05-07, maximilian attems m...@stro.at wrote:
On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 02:25:25PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
i would have been happier to push the soon to come 2.6.30 for lenny+half,
but that looks impossible
Hi,
On Donnerstag, 7. Mai 2009, maximilian attems wrote:
if you would have mentioned ath5k somewhere in your bugreport, your
intention would have been clearer. no we can't keep a hash table of every
linux-2.6 bug in our maintainers mems :P
point taken, sorry.
i would have been happier to
On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 02:25:25PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
i would have been happier to push the soon to come 2.6.30 for lenny+half,
but that looks impossible due to the multiple security support
that our team currently has to handle going from
oldstable 2.6.18 and 2.6.24, stable
On 2009-05-07, maximilian attems m...@stro.at wrote:
On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 02:25:25PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
i would have been happier to push the soon to come 2.6.30 for lenny+half,
but that looks impossible due to the multiple security support
that our team currently has to
4 matches
Mail list logo
