Le dimanche 10 mars 2013 16:29:48, vous avez écrit : > > If it's the rule, then OK. This is not really important as security > fixes or data losses. It's just part of "useless wakeups" hunt. I try to > eradicate those behaviour, in order to have a really efficient server: > less wakeups, less wasted watts. Or more services at the same time. > So, unfortunately for me, I have to admit than it is not important > enough to be included only in Debian. I'll have to wait for inclusion in > upstream then.
Not really a written rule but most distributors prefer not to diverge too much from upstream projects. However, once accepted upstream, I'm willing to include this patch in Debian without waiting for the new release that would include this patch. > > Thanks for your answer! > > Adrien Best regards, Thomas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
