On Jun 17, 2007, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's full of kludges exactly because it tries to carve out a notion
> that can only be determined on case-to-case basis and not by generic
> definition.
I agree it's a very difficult definition. I'm not sure I'm happy with
the wording in
On Sunday 17 June 2007 01:09:01 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> I've already explained what the spirit of the GPL is.
> >
> > No. You've explained one thing only: that you cannot see that
On Jun 17, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> They're based on the Free Software definition, that establishes the
>> four freedoms that the GPL was designed to respect and defend.
> The GPL is a software license, *independent* of
On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 17 June 2007 00:19:49 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Saturday 16 June 2007 21:54:56 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> >> There may be laws that require certification or
On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 16 June 2007 23:31:00 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > But each of those arguments is based on a technicality.
>>
>> They're based on the Free Software definition,
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 12:31:00AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> I'm not trying to say why Linus and others chose the GPLv2.
>
> I'm not trying to determine what their motivations were.
>
> I'm not trying to force them to change to GPLv3.
>
> I'm not trying to convince them that tivozation
On Jun 17, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> I've already explained what the spirit of the GPL is.
> No. You've explained one thing only: that you cannot see that people don't
> *agree* on the "spirit".
They don't have to.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 06:25:00PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> > You: conceptully-new add-on which benefits 0.25% of the user base, provided
> > they select the right config options and filesystem.
> >
> > Me: simpler enhancement which benefits 100% of the user base (ie: includes
> > 4k
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 04:08:44PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 12:56:18PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:09:36 -0400
> > "John W. Linville" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > It does not make sense to me to rip this out purely for aesthetic
>
* Sam Ravnborg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi Mathieu.
>
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:30:00PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > EXTRARW_DATA adds a place to declare rw data that will not be mixed with the
> > .data content; therefore limiting data cache pollution when data is put in
> > the
* Sam Ravnborg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> From your patch it looks like I originally missed out
> powerpc + xtensa when introducing DATA_DATA - would be nice if
> you could fix that.
>
> Sam
Use DATA_DATA in xtensa
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
On Sunday 17 June 2007 00:19:49 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 16 June 2007 21:54:56 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> There may be laws that require certification or limitations on the
> >> user. Manufacturer giving up the ability
On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 16 June 2007 21:54:56 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> There may be laws that require certification or limitations on the
>> user. Manufacturer giving up the ability to make modifications would
>> address this, or *perhaps*
* Sam Ravnborg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> From your patch it looks like I originally missed out
> powerpc + xtensa when introducing DATA_DATA - would be nice if
> you could fix that.
>
> Sam
Add missing DATA_DATA in powerpc
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
On Saturday 16 June 2007 23:31:00 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But each of those arguments is based on a technicality.
>
> They're based on the Free Software definition, that establishes the
> four freedoms that the GPL was designed to
* Sam Ravnborg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> From your patch it looks like I originally missed out
> powerpc + xtensa when introducing DATA_DATA - would be nice if
> you could fix that.
>
Use DATA_DATA in CRIS
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
On Jun 16, 2007, "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 2007, "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > No, this is completely and utterly wrong. By this logic, Linux
>> > isn't free if
>> > I can't run it on *YOUR* laptop. TiVo places restrictions on
>> > *hardware*.
In a stunning turn of events, I've actually been able to make another -rc
release despite all the discussion (*cough*flaming*cough*) about other
issues, and we now have a brand-spanking-new Linux 2.6.22-rc5 release
out there!
As usual, you get *five* kernels for the price of one! You can get
On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But each of those arguments is based on a technicality.
They're based on the Free Software definition, that establishes the
four freedoms that the GPL was designed to respect and defend.
Each version of the GPL may miss the mark.
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 09:15:14AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:40:03 +0100 David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Make NFS root work by creating a "/root" directory to satisfy the mount,
> > otherwise the path lookup for the mount fails with ENOENT.
> >
>
> Am
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> I've already explained what the spirit of the GPL is.
No. You've explained one thing only: that you cannot see that people don't
*agree* on the "spirit".
You think that there is only one "spirit", and that you own the code-book,
and that your
On Saturday 16 June 2007 21:54:56 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I obviously wasn't clear enough. The only way to come into complience
> > with GPL3dd4 is to reduce your ability to fix things or grant everyone
> > else the ability to mess
On Saturday 16 June 2007 21:49:56 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 16 June 2007 15:27:37 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > I don't see how TiVO has done this. They have
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 09:24:11PM +0100, Adrian McMenamin wrote:
> This is a patched 2.6.21.5 - which might be an issue. But this is what I
> get:
>
> LD .tmp_vmlinux1
> arch/sh/kernel/built-in.o: In function `restore_all':
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4/../sh3/entry.S:(.text+0x50cc): undefined
>
> On Jun 16, 2007, "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, this is completely and utterly wrong. By this logic, Linux
> > isn't free if
> > I can't run it on *YOUR* laptop. TiVo places restrictions on
> > *hardware*. The
> > hardware is not free.
> TiVo uses the hardware to stop the
On Sunday 17 June 2007 02:42:18 Maximilian Engelhardt wrote:
> I did build a kernel without the three mentioned above but the problem is
> still the same. I also did remove everything but eth0 on interrupt 10 so the
> only device using that interrupt is eth0 and then the card completely stopped
On Jun 16, 2007, Bernd Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See, that's the problem I have with your arguments. "Same freedom for
> everyone" is a political slogan. It is not a reasoned thought.
Well, this is what got us GPLv2. And the same reasoning is getting us
GPLv3, and it does get
The latest maintenance release GIT 1.5.2.2 is available at the
usual places:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/
git-1.5.2.2.tar.{gz,bz2} (tarball)
git-htmldocs-1.5.2.2.tar.{gz,bz2} (preformatted docs)
git-manpages-1.5.2.2.tar.{gz,bz2}
On Jun 16, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I obviously wasn't clear enough. The only way to come into complience
> with GPL3dd4 is to reduce your ability to fix things or grant everyone
> else the ability to mess with things. This severely restricts you from
> doing _anything_
On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 16 June 2007 15:27:37 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I don't see how TiVO has done this. They have placed no restrictions on
>> > *modification* at all. What they
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Wakko Warner wrote:
> When I've had an unclean shutdown on one of my systems (10x 50gb raid5) it's
> always slowed the system down when booting up. Quite significantly I must
> say. I wait until I can login and change the rebuild max speed to slow it
> down while I'm using
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, David Greaves wrote:
> Neil Brown wrote:
> > On Friday June 15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > As I understand the way
> > > raid works, when you write a block to the array, it will have to read all
> > > the other
On Jun 16, 2007, "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I don't see how TiVO has done this. They have placed no restrictions on
>> > *modification* at all. What they have done is placed a restriction on
>> > *REPLACEMENT*
I just received a Dell Latitude D630, with the new Intel Santa Rosa
platform. Currently, the only major driver issue I have is sound. It
worked fine in Ubuntu Feisty's 2.6.20 kernel, but now I am using Gutsy
so I can have graphics drivers. Gutsy's 2.6.22-rc3-based kernel no
longer recognized
> What are the issues with arch like ARM ?
The interesting class ARM belongs to is machines that don't (or don't
always) have hardware support for single-step. Maintaining the status quo
of how PTRACE_SINGLESTEP functions on these machines is different in
implementation under utrace than it is
> You: conceptully-new add-on which benefits 0.25% of the user base, provided
> they select the right config options and filesystem.
>
> Me: simpler enhancement which benefits 100% of the user base (ie: includes
> 4k blocksize, 4k pagesize) and which also fixes your performance problem
> with
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 08:21:22PM -0600, Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
> Linus,
>
> Just take a vote and start tagging files and ignore this needless
> diatribe. It is was it is, I seriously doubt you will
> get all of Linux moved to GPL3 as a monolith, since you will never get
> concensus. You
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
The trick in the NetWare 3 model was to segregate the directory
entries onto special reserved
4K directory blocks (128 byte dir records). When it came time to purge
storage after the file system filled, an entire 4K block and all
chains was deleted during block
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
No, I'm arguing that it's not "mere aggregation" - the kernel is useless
on that machine unless the BIOS is present or replaced with something
else with equivalent functionality.
That's *not* a valid argument!
Alan Cox wrote:
(Vax/VMS System Software Handbook)
(TOPS-20 User's Manual)
Also Files/11
Basic versioning goes back to at least ITS
Not sure how old doing file versioning and hiding it away with a tool to
go rescue the stuff you blew away by mistake is, but Novell Netware 3
certainly
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
>
> No, I'm arguing that it's not "mere aggregation" - the kernel is useless
> on that machine unless the BIOS is present or replaced with something
> else with equivalent functionality.
That's *not* a valid argument!
I know, I know, it's a common
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 02:23:25PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
>...
> [Adrian, I'm not saying "too few users run -rc kernels", I'm saying "too
> few FireWire driver users run -rc kernels".]
Getting more people testing -rc kernels might be possible, and I don't
think it would be too hard. And
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jun 16 2007 22:42, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
>> @@ -180,12 +182,17 @@ sub ctx_block_get {
>> sub ctx_block_outer {
>> my ($linenr, $remain) = @_;
>>
>> -return ctx_block_get($linenr, $remain, 1);
>> +return ctx_block_get($linenr, $remain, 1, '\{', '\}');
>
>
On Sunday 17 June 2007, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 23:27:43 +0200
>
> Maximilian Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I recently did some test and found out something interesting about the
> > b44 problem I wrote earlier.
> >
> > The problem is the
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Bernd Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>> On Jun 15, 2007, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
What this means for the FSF goals if Tivo get up one morning and switch
their system firmware to ROM however is
[note: I'm writting this while offline and likely to remain so for the
next 8 hours or so, so I'll probably miss a bunch of other replies]
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 02:14:29PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 00:26 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 12:42:29 -0700 (PDT)
> Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I am not in favor of any enhancements to the ptrace interface.
> > It is a terrible interface and just needs to die.
>
> That might make sense if utrace
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:12:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>"In order to protect your freedoms, we sometimes have to take some
> freedoms away. In particular, the freedom of critical thinking got
> revoked last year, because people were just too 'confused'"
ITYM "upgraded to
Hi all.
I'm currently running with the combined patch applied all the time, and it
seems to be working fine here, including with hibernation.
Regards,
Nigel
--
Nigel, Michelle and Alisdair Cunningham
5 Mitchell Street
Cobden 3266
Victoria, Australia
pgpWMNFx8xpyo.pgp
Description: PGP
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 23:27:43 +0200
Maximilian Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I recently did some test and found out something interesting about the b44
> problem I wrote earlier.
>
> The problem is the following:
> When I use my BCM4401 with the b44 driver in wireless-dev
On Saturday, 16 June 2007 21:56, David Greaves wrote:
> This isn't a regression.
>
> I was seeing these problems on 2.6.21 (but 22 was in -rc so I waited to try
> it).
> I tried 2.6.22-rc4 (with Tejun's patches) to see if it had improved - no.
>
> Note this is a different (desktop) machine to
David Greaves wrote:
This isn't a regression.
I was seeing these problems on 2.6.21 (but 22 was in -rc so I waited to
try it).
I tried 2.6.22-rc4 (with Tejun's patches) to see if it had improved - no.
Note this is a different (desktop) machine to that involved my recent bugs.
The machine
On Saturday 16 June 2007 18:01:59 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 16 June 2007 04:21:04 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > In the case of renting a machine you can try
On Jun 16, 2007, "Jesper Juhl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 16/06/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 2007, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > How the hell does that improve the situation for users?
>>
>> Maybe it doesn't. How does it make it worse?
>>
>
On Saturday 16 June 2007 15:27:37 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't see how TiVO has done this. They have placed no restrictions on
> > *modification* at all. What they have done is placed a restriction on
> > *REPLACEMENT* of the
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Jesper Juhl wrote:
>
> Now not even the vendor can upgrade the software in the hardware and
> fix problems for the user. The user loses.
You're seeing that the wrong way.
The correct response is (and I quote from the manual, pick one talking
point at random):
"This is
> (Vax/VMS System Software Handbook)
> (TOPS-20 User's Manual)
Also Files/11
Basic versioning goes back to at least ITS
Not sure how old doing file versioning and hiding it away with a tool to
go rescue the stuff you blew away by mistake is, but Novell Netware 3
certainly did a good job on
On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 16 June 2007 04:21:04 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > In the case of renting a machine you can try to legislate new laws all
>> > you want. It doesn't make a
On Jun 16 2007 22:42, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
>@@ -180,12 +182,17 @@ sub ctx_block_get {
> sub ctx_block_outer {
> my ($linenr, $remain) = @_;
>
>- return ctx_block_get($linenr, $remain, 1);
>+ return ctx_block_get($linenr, $remain, 1, '\{', '\}');
'\\{'.
Or, if it works,
Hello
We are mapping struct page ptrs from scattergather list entries using
kmap_atomic(page_ptr, KM_USER0) to get the virtual address for doing a
copy to work around some alignment restrictions in our driver.
If the first entry in the scatterlist has length > 4k (say 11k) and has
an offset of
Hello,
I recently did some test and found out something interesting about the b44
problem I wrote earlier.
The problem is the following:
When I use my BCM4401 with the b44 driver in wireless-dev I get very high ping
times looking like this:
64 bytes from 172.30.10.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64
On 16/06/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 16, 2007, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How the hell does that improve the situation for users?
Maybe it doesn't. How does it make it worse?
Now not even the vendor can upgrade the software in the hardware and
fix
Hopefully this fixes http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8635
The struct in6_addr passed to csum_ipv6_magic() is 4 byte aligned,
so we can't use the regular 64-bit loads.
Since the cost of handling of 4 byte and 1 byte aligned 64-bit data is
roughly the same, this code can cope with any
This version brings a some new tests, and a host of changes to fix
false positives, of particular note:
- detect 'var ++;' and 'var --;' as a bad combination
- multistatement #defines are now checked based on statement count
- multistatement #defines with initialisation correctly reported
-
Hi Soeren,
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 22:43:05 +0200, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
> this commit makes coretemp fail on my macbook pro.
>
> 1) rmmod oopses (see below)
> 2) it breaks s2ram
>
> Soeren
>
> commit 67f363b1f6a31cf5027a97372f64bcced4f05ba6
> Author: Rudolf Marek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date:
DEC had versioning files systems 30 years ago. Any
patents on their style must certainly have expired
long ago.
Look at RSX-11 and other seventies era operating
systems.
This is ancient stuff.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Hello All , Does anoyone know howto identify a cause for these(*) ?
Or of any tools to help in the identification of the cause ?
So far the Machine checks only happen when I am running bonnie++ against
my software raid6 array .
I have done everything I
Jan Harkes wrote:
> Sites like portal.acm.org and citeseer.ist.psu.edu are good places to
> find copies of these papers. They also provide links to other work that
> either is cited by, or cites these papers which is a convenient way to
> find other papers in this area.
>
> Researching, designing
this commit makes coretemp fail on my macbook pro.
1) rmmod oopses (see below)
2) it breaks s2ram
Soeren
commit 67f363b1f6a31cf5027a97372f64bcced4f05ba6
Author: Rudolf Marek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun May 27 22:17:43 2007 +0200
hwmon/coretemp: Add more safety checks
Add detection
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 02:03:49PM -0600, Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
> Jan Harkes wrote:
> >implementation, just a high level description. Finally advising anyone
> >(who is not an actual patent lawyer that could correctly interpret the
> >language and scope of a patent) to go search out patents
This is a patched 2.6.21.5 - which might be an issue. But this is what I
get:
LD .tmp_vmlinux1
arch/sh/kernel/built-in.o: In function `restore_all':
arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4/../sh3/entry.S:(.text+0x50cc): undefined
reference to `in_nmi'
make: *** [.tmp_vmlinux1] Error 1
-
To unsubscribe from
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* malc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Interesting, the idle time accounting (done from
account_system_time()) has not changed. Has your .config changed?
Could you please send it across. I've downloaded apc and I am trying
to reproduce your problem.
Alan Cox wrote:
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.jsp?LANG=ENG=PCT_TYPE=19=1211506-KEY_FIELD=256=0=1205953=10_SET=IA,WO,TTL-EN=1=3=1=25=SEP-0/HITNUM,B-ENG,DP,MC,PA,ABSUM-ENG_IA=US2005045566=%28IN%2fmerkey%29+
The last one was filed with WIPO and has international protection, UK
included.
> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't see how TiVO has done this. They have placed no restrictions on
> > *modification* at all. What they have done is placed a restriction on
> > *REPLACEMENT* of the program.
> Technicality. In order for the software to
> http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.jsp?LANG=ENG=PCT_TYPE=19=1211506-KEY_FIELD=256=0=1205953=10_SET=IA,WO,TTL-EN=1=3=1=25=SEP-0/HITNUM,B-ENG,DP,MC,PA,ABSUM-ENG_IA=US2005045566=%28IN%2fmerkey%29+
>
> The last one was filed with WIPO and has international protection, UK
> included.
Nope. EU and
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:44:52PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> make pci_ids lowercase hexa
Why? What good is this going to do in the long run?
Also, shouldn't you send pci specific patches like this to the pci
maintainer? :)
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
This isn't a regression.
I was seeing these problems on 2.6.21 (but 22 was in -rc so I waited to try it).
I tried 2.6.22-rc4 (with Tejun's patches) to see if it had improved - no.
Note this is a different (desktop) machine to that involved my recent bugs.
The machine will work for days
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 01:05:44PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15 2007, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > SCSI marks internal commands with REQ_PREEMPT and push it at the front
> > of the request queue using blk_execute_rq(). When entering suspended
> > or frozen state, SCSI devices are quiesced
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 03:08:17PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Starting beeper as soon as ACPI sleep returns is very useful in
> debugging "apparently dead" machines. If it beeps at all, it makes
> sense to start playing with CMOS tracer.
thank you very much Pavel
The results are a bit
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:20:31AM -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
> hi,
>
> i was just looking at the new madvise_need_mmap_write() call...can we
> avoid an extra case statement and function call as follows?
Sounds like a good idea, but please move the assignment out of the
conditional.
-
To
Sanjoy Mahajan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So you have to give recipients the license text from a particular
> version of the GPL. To make that the only version unde which the work
> is licensed, you have to add something like "Licensed under the
> GPLv2". Otherwise sec. 9 says that you offer
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
> When you get into the recycling issues with storage, the patents come
> into play. Also, using the file name to reference revisions is already
> the subject of a patent previously filed (I no longer own the patent, I
> sold them to Canopy). There is a third one about to
On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They are not keeping a priviledge over the *SOFTWARE* at all. They
> are keeping a priviledge over the *HARDWARE*.
No, they're using the hardware (along with other pieces of software)
to deny users (but not themselves) the freedoms
On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't see how TiVO has done this. They have placed no restrictions on
> *modification* at all. What they have done is placed a restriction on
> *REPLACEMENT* of the program.
Technicality. In order for the software to remain free
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007, Carlo Wood wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:28:13AM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> > That's not actually the right image. There's a graph of commits with a lot
> > of splitting and joining lines. Each branch and each tag sits something in
> > this web. The difference
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 14:43 -0400, Daniel Hazelton wrote:
> >
> > You mean renting the computer with the software in it is not
> > distribution of the software?
>
> It is. But you don't have the same rights to a rented machine as you do to
> one
> you have purchased. In fact, in renting a
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 15:41 +0100, Alistair John Strachan wrote:
> On Saturday 16 June 2007 11:36:00 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > The -hrt tree at http://www.tglx.de/projects/hrtimers/2.6.22-rc4/ contains
> > also an hpet force patch series from Venki Pallipadi, but I leave this up
> > to Venki to
Oleg,
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 20:51 +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > arch/arm/plat-omap/timer32k.c |2 +
>
> Testers and users are most likely to run one particular arch on
> one particular test bench. If individual patches are arch
> separated, i think bisecting will be a little bit easier.
On Jun 16, 2007, Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How the hell does that improve the situation for users?
Maybe it doesn't. How does it make it worse?
Maybe just providing an incentive for the vendor to respect users'
freedoms will do the trick, and *some* vendors will do, while those
who
Jan Harkes wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:12:14AM -0600, Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
over). There's also another patent filed as well. It's a noble
effort to do a free version, but be aware there's some big guns with
patents out there already, not to
On Saturday 16 June 2007 04:21:04 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Friday 15 June 2007 23:44:00 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jun 16, 2007, Tim Post <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 23:29 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
Mark Williamson wrote:
I reviewed your sample implementation, and it appears to infringe 3
patents already.You should do some research on this.
Are you able to tell us which areas of the code infringe existing patents?
Yes.
Jeff
Cheers,
Mark
-
To unsubscribe from
* malc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Interesting, the idle time accounting (done from
> > account_system_time()) has not changed. Has your .config changed?
> > Could you please send it across. I've downloaded apc and I am trying
> > to reproduce your problem.
>
>
* From: Thomas Gleixner
[]
> Fixup the existing users.
>
> This removes the sysfs entry for the HPET, which is now controlled by
> the clockevents resume code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-davinci/time.c |2 +
> arch/arm/mach-imx/time.c
On Saturday 16 June 2007 13:14:29 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:22:21AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > because it could easily be argued that
On Saturday 16 June 2007 12:57:59 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Bernd Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jun 15, 2007, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> What this means for the FSF goals if Tivo get up one morning and switch
> >>> their system
[Stefan Richter - Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 07:43:12PM +0200]
| From: Stefan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| CC: "Kok, Auke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
| Chris Friesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
| LKML ,
| Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
| Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:57:59PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Bernd Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jun 15, 2007, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> What this means for the FSF goals if Tivo get up one morning and switch
>
On 18:31 Чтв 14 Июн , Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 05:57:59PM +0400, Dmitriy Monakhov wrote:
> > Function prerform check for signgle region, with out respect to
> > segment nature of iovec, For example writev no longer works :)
>
> Btw, could someone please start
On Saturday 16 June 2007 13:11, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 15:53 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 10:29 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On 6/15/07, Richard Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 13:29 +0100, Richard Hughes
1 - 100 of 454 matches
Mail list logo
