.
Hurray!
Lennert
On Wednesday 02 February 2005 17:00, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, Lennert Van Alboom wrote:
> > I applied the patch and it works like a charm. As a kinky side effect:
> > before this patch, using a compiled-in vesa or vga16 framebuffer worked
> >
I applied the patch and it works like a charm. As a kinky side effect: before
this patch, using a compiled-in vesa or vga16 framebuffer worked with the
proprietary nvidia driver, whereas now tty1-6 are corrupt when not using
80x25. Strangeness :)
Lennert
On Monday 24 January 2005 23:35, Linus
I applied the patch and it works like a charm. As a kinky side effect: before
this patch, using a compiled-in vesa or vga16 framebuffer worked with the
proprietary nvidia driver, whereas now tty1-6 are corrupt when not using
80x25. Strangeness :)
Lennert
On Monday 24 January 2005 23:35, Linus
.
Hurray!
Lennert
On Wednesday 02 February 2005 17:00, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, Lennert Van Alboom wrote:
I applied the patch and it works like a charm. As a kinky side effect:
before this patch, using a compiled-in vesa or vga16 framebuffer worked
with the proprietary nvidia
[1.] One line summary of the problem:
Possible memleak in 2.6.11-rc1?
[2.] Full description of the problem/report:
I compiled a vanilla 2.6.11-rc1 kernel with the .config from my (working)
2.6.10 kernel; whenever I use it, my memory is slowly eaten. The "Active:"
part of /proc/meminfo goes up
[1.] One line summary of the problem:
Possible memleak in 2.6.11-rc1?
[2.] Full description of the problem/report:
I compiled a vanilla 2.6.11-rc1 kernel with the .config from my (working)
2.6.10 kernel; whenever I use it, my memory is slowly eaten. The Active:
part of /proc/meminfo goes up
6 matches
Mail list logo
