Linux 2.2.18pre16

2000-10-15 Thread Alan Cox
Ok so Im back and its time to shift the backlog. Nothing too bad has come up so far. This merges the pending DSL driver and NFSv3 patches and fixes further bugs along the way. The big chunk is the m68k patches which dont touch non m68k code. Various folks have commented on the size of the 2.2.18

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre16

2000-10-15 Thread David S. Miller
Any particular reason why the new asm-m68k/*.h headers ended up under asm-i386? :-) I know this makes more work for you Alan, but all of these silly errors (bogus reject files left in the tree, mistakedly leaving vmlinux.lds autogenerated files in the tree, etc.) would have a minuscule chance of

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre16

2000-10-15 Thread Matthew Dharm
On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:27:25AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > -=usb backport (no effect if you say no to usb) Alan -- As the USB Mass Storage driver maintainer, I'd like to ask you to mark the USB Mass Storage driver as EXPERIMENTAL for the 2.2.x kernel series. This is an unsupported, known b

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre16

2000-10-16 Thread Alan Cox
> Any particular reason why the new asm-m68k/*.h headers ended up under > asm-i386? :-) Its called 'I can apply this last diff just a minute before release, it cant possibly go wrong'. Fixed in my tree Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body o

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre16

2000-10-16 Thread Alan Cox
> P.S. I apologize if this driver is allready marked EXPERIMENTAL for 2.2.x > -- but I don't have the disk space right now to check, and I wanted to make > sure that, as the maintainer, my official opinion on the matter was voiced. Its already marked experimental, no problem. - To unsubscribe fro

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre16

2000-10-16 Thread Matthias Andree
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Alan Cox wrote: > 2.2.18pre16 > o Finally get the m68k tree merged(Andrew McPherson >and a cast of many) Ah. Very good. > o NFSv3 server patches merge (Dave Higgen) This is

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre16

2000-10-17 Thread Camm Maguire
Greetings! Will this kernel still have the 'VM: do_try_to_free_memory failed' bug that is plaguing us here? If so, my I suggest adding a merge of Andrea's fix on the TODO list for 2.2.18 final? Take care, -- Camm Maguire[EMAIL PROTECTED] ==

Re: Linux 2.2.18pre16

2000-10-17 Thread Alan Cox
> Will this kernel still have the 'VM: do_try_to_free_memory failed' bug > that is plaguing us here? If so, my I suggest adding a merge of probably > Andrea's fix on the TODO list for 2.2.18 final? I dont plan to. Now is not the time to do this. We also need to understand the issue in detail