Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> >
> > I spent my full day going through my archives and splitting
> > the big patch of Dag into lots of small patches (see attached). I'm
> > glad I've got a big hard drive full of junk.
>
> When I say mu
On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 06:43:26PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> Ok, thanks to the work of Jean, everything seems to be applied now.
>
> I'll make a test3 one of these days (probably tomorrow), please verify
> that everything looks happy.
>
> Linus
Linus,
S
Ok, thanks to the work of Jean, everything seems to be applied now.
I'll make a test3 one of these days (probably tomorrow), please verify
that everything looks happy.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [
Hi!
> Some options:
>
> 1) Split up the large patch and fix the things you didn't like, submit them
> with better discription. But then It's probably to late anyway for 2.4 (even if
> the 2.4-test series is not the most stable stuff I've tried). Is it
> to late for this?
Probably not. Get tyts
On Fri, Nov 10, 2000 at 11:56:57AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> When I say multiple mails, I mean multiple mails. NOT "26 attachements in
> one mail". In fact, not a single attachment at all, please. Send me
> patches as a regular text body, with the explanation at the top, and the
> patch ju
On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
>
> I spent my full day going through my archives and splitting
> the big patch of Dag into lots of small patches (see attached). I'm
> glad I've got a big hard drive full of junk.
When I say multiple mails, I mean multiple mails. NOT "26 attach
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> and these people expect me to reply, sending long explanations of why I
> don't like them? After they did nothing of the sort for the code they
> claim should have been applied? Nada.
Did you say that to them? I'm not saying you're wrong; but did you tell
them that? It mig
Hi Linus,
I agree that the latest patch wasn't good about specifying its contents.
But in fact, the 26th of august I sent you a mail which was much better
(but then your mailbox crashed or something!?) Since you hadn't applied
any previoius patches (and not even the patches from Russell), I fe
Jean Tourrilhes writes:
> If you can break up stuff that has accumulated over one year,
> please tell me so. Most of the original patches have been lost in the
> mist of time. We could send it file by file, but that would give some
> interesting results ;-)
That doesn't work either ;( Som
Linus Torvalds writes:
> ONE message during the last month. ONE huge patch. From people who should
> have known about 2.4.x being pending for some time.
>
> 10,000+ lines of diff, with _no_ effort to split it up, or explain it with
> anything but
>
> "o Fixes IrDA in 2.4"
>
> and these p
On Wed, 8 Nov 2000, Michael Rothwell wrote:
>
> Like what? I'm not sure what you're saying here. It seems that the pople
> writing the IrDA code have gotten no feedback from you as to why their
> patch is never accepted -- could you clarify?
Just to clarify.
The ONLY message from the IrDA peo
On Wed, 8 Nov 2000, Michael Rothwell wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Also, I've never seen much in the form of explanation, and at least the
> > last patch I saw just the first screenful was so off-putting that I just
> > went "Ok, I have real bugs to fix, I don't need this crap".
>
> Li
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Michael Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Linus, can you post reasons why you keep ignoring^W rejecting the IrDA
> > patch?
>
> Basically, whatever Alan rants, I've not seen the patches all that many
> times at all.
>
> Also, I've never seen much in the form
On Tue, Nov 07, 2000 at 08:24:38PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> Take a look at
> http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9908.0/0669.html This
> happened with ISDN. Slightly different situation, but similar.
I'm familiar with that. The *BIG* difference is that Dag has
always sen
14 matches
Mail list logo
