Hi Pete.
On Wednesday 20 June 2007 09:36:42 Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 08:45:19 +1000, Nigel Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > I'd like to see this enabled too. USB related suspend and resume problems
have
> > gone away since around 2.6.18, and I'm pretty sure that at
On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 10:17 -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> On 06/24/2007 03:25 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 16:36 -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> >> Why do we explicitly remove atomic.h from our kernel header package?
> >
> > No reason any more. Once upon a time, before the clea
On 06/24/2007 03:25 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 16:36 -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
>> Why do we explicitly remove atomic.h from our kernel header package?
>
> No reason any more. Once upon a time, before the cleanup of the upstream
> kernel's exports was complete, we needed to
/me is late in the game -- I was on vacation in the past two weeks and
tried to keep a bit away from the keyboard
On 19.06.2007 22:01, Josh Boyer wrote:
> I'd like to just do a brief poll here just to see how many are yay or
> nay for kmods. And I'm not talking about their current implementation
