Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2012-07-02 Thread Adam D. Barratt
Hi, On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 18:11 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 04:41:35PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 14:57 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: As discussed last week shortly on IRC, attached is now the debdiff (only changed changelog

Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2012-07-01 Thread Salvatore Bonaccorso
Hi Adam On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 07:31:00PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: Hi On Fri, Apr 06, 2012 at 09:42:54PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 21:26 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 18:18 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at

Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2012-07-01 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 14:57 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: As discussed last week shortly on IRC, attached is now the debdiff (only changed changelog entry to reflect NMU) for powertop. (I have added win...@debian.org to recipient lists) Can I upload this? Please go ahead; thanks.

Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2012-07-01 Thread Salvatore Bonaccorso
Hi Adam On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 04:41:35PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 14:57 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: As discussed last week shortly on IRC, attached is now the debdiff (only changed changelog entry to reflect NMU) for powertop. (I have added

Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2012-06-26 Thread Salvatore Bonaccorso
Hi On Fri, Apr 06, 2012 at 09:42:54PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 21:26 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 18:18 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 01:39:03PM +0100, Patrick Winnertz wrote: Impressive design. What would happen

Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2012-04-06 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 21:26 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 18:18 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 01:39:03PM +0100, Patrick Winnertz wrote: Impressive design. What would happen if it skips half of the config? I agree that not segfaulting is

Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2011-11-22 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 18:18 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 01:39:03PM +0100, Patrick Winnertz wrote: Impressive design. What would happen if it skips half of the config? I agree that not segfaulting is incredibly better than segfaulting, but like this the remaining

Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2011-10-19 Thread Philipp Kern
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 01:39:03PM +0100, Patrick Winnertz wrote: Impressive design. What would happen if it skips half of the config? I agree that not segfaulting is incredibly better than segfaulting, but like this the remaining bunch of lines will be silently ignored? I've rewritten

Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2011-03-17 Thread Patrick Winnertz
Hey, Impressive design. What would happen if it skips half of the config? I agree that not segfaulting is incredibly better than segfaulting, but like this the remaining bunch of lines will be silently ignored? I've rewritten the patch from Mel Gorman, now you'll get a printf output on the

[SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2011-03-11 Thread Patrick Winnertz
Hey, I would like to close one important bug in powertop, which affects the usage on newer kernels (e.g. 2.6.37), as powertop will segfault on such kernels due to too small buffer (see #610101). Please see my attached patch for powertop 1.11-1+squeeze1 Greetings Winnie diff -u

Re: [SRU] update for powertop in 6.0.1

2011-03-11 Thread Philipp Kern
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:59:51AM +0100, Patrick Winnertz wrote: Hey, I would like to close one important bug in powertop, which affects the usage on newer kernels (e.g. 2.6.37), as powertop will segfault on such kernels due to too small buffer (see #610101). Please see my attached