Re: 2.6.20 [was Re: 2.6.21-rc5 ]

2007-04-02 Thread maximilian attems
On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 11:51:17PM +, Oleg Verych wrote: > 01-04-2007, maximilian attems: > > > so next step would be to upload 2.6.20 into unstable. > > announcing upload for tuesday. > > please tell if you have some patches needing to go into. > > 2.6.20.5 is planned on the same day: > > |

Re: 2.6.21-rc5

2007-04-01 Thread Otavio Salvador
Frederik Schueler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, > > On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 07:22:38PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: >> any voices against basing trunk on latest upstream? >> have an i386 working tree to commit. >> >> should 2.6.20 first be copied to sid? > > IMHO we should upload 2.6.20.4

Re: 2.6.20 [was Re: 2.6.21-rc5 ]

2007-04-01 Thread Oleg Verych
01-04-2007, maximilian attems: > On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Oleg Verych wrote: > >> I'm running it nearly five days. I'm on amd64, without sysfs, did some >> dvd burning, playing music have strange random glitches (maybe some >> more NO_HZ problems). >> >> But i would suggest to wait next rc, it's going

2.6.20 [was Re: 2.6.21-rc5 ]

2007-04-01 Thread maximilian attems
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Oleg Verych wrote: > I'm running it nearly five days. I'm on amd64, without sysfs, did some > dvd burning, playing music have strange random glitches (maybe some > more NO_HZ problems). > > But i would suggest to wait next rc, it's going to be very soon. why waiting? it woul

Re: 2.6.21-rc5

2007-04-01 Thread Frederik Schueler
Hi, On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 07:22:38PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > any voices against basing trunk on latest upstream? > have an i386 working tree to commit. > > should 2.6.20 first be copied to sid? IMHO we should upload 2.6.20.4 to unstable, and 2.6.21-rc to experimental. Best regards

Re: 2.6.21-rc5

2007-03-31 Thread Sven Luther
On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 07:22:38PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > any voices against basing trunk on latest upstream? > have an i386 working tree to commit. > > should 2.6.20 first be copied to sid? The etch kernel is frozen, right, and will never be updated, so there is nothing stopping us fr

Re: 2.6.21-rc5

2007-03-31 Thread Otavio Salvador
maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > any voices against basing trunk on latest upstream? > have an i386 working tree to commit. > > should 2.6.20 first be copied to sid? I would appreciate to have it uploaded at least to experimental before moving to .21. Just my 2c -- O T

Re: 2.6.21-rc5

2007-03-31 Thread Oleg Verych
> From: maximilian attems > Subject: 2.6.21-rc5 > Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 19:22:38 +0200 > > any voices against basing trunk on latest upstream? I'm running it nearly five days. I'm on amd64, without sysfs, did some dvd burning, playing music have strange random glitch

2.6.21-rc5

2007-03-31 Thread maximilian attems
any voices against basing trunk on latest upstream? have an i386 working tree to commit. should 2.6.20 first be copied to sid? -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]