Yes, good work, thanks a lot for it! The new interface is much better and more
useful.
Greetings,
Rafael
PS
BTW, would that be possible to create the "Hibernation/Suspend" subcategory
of "Power Management" that I asked for some time ago, please? :-)
Oops. Sorry. Done.
M.
-
To
On Tuesday, 19 June 2007 02:28, Martin Bligh wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
> >> I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
> >> ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
> >
> > I'm hoping it's not "ended".
> >
> > IOW, I really don't
On Tuesday, 19 June 2007 02:28, Martin Bligh wrote:
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
I'm hoping it's not ended.
IOW, I really don't think we _resolved_
Yes, good work, thanks a lot for it! The new interface is much better and more
useful.
Greetings,
Rafael
PS
BTW, would that be possible to create the Hibernation/Suspend subcategory
of Power Management that I asked for some time ago, please? :-)
Oops. Sorry. Done.
M.
-
To unsubscribe
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
I'm hoping it's not "ended".
IOW, I really don't think we _resolved_ anything, although the work that
Adrian started is continuing
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
I'm hoping it's not ended.
IOW, I really don't think we _resolved_ anything, although the work that
Adrian started is continuing
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 10:44:39AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
[]
> >That's wrong if developers are tending to reply only one thing --
> >git-bisect.
> >
> >If things are going to be that bad, then better to start dealing with the
> >cause, not
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 12:22:26PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+If the patch introduces a new regression and this
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 04:24:30PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 02:13:39PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Sunday, 17 June 2007 13:47, Oleg Verych wrote:
> []
> > > It's OK _only_ in case of unknown, hard to find *hardware* bugs.
> > >
> > > If you think it's "a good
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 02:13:39PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sunday, 17 June 2007 13:47, Oleg Verych wrote:
[]
> > It's OK _only_ in case of unknown, hard to find *hardware* bugs.
> >
> > If you think it's "a good thing" for bad, untested by developer
> > code, then something is
Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> "choose minor evil to prevent a greater one"
The measurement of "evil" is subjective. That's why there are releases
with known regressions.
--
Stefan Richter
-=-=-=== -==- =---=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On 17/06/07, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 11:41:36AM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Adrian Bunk pisze:
>> 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
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 11:41:36AM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Adrian Bunk pisze:
>> 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
On Sunday, 17 June 2007 13:47, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 12:22:26PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> > On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +If the patch
On Sunday, 17 June 2007 12:22, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +If the patch introduces a new regression and this regression was not
> > > fixed
> >
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 12:22:26PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> +If the patch introduces a new regression and this regression was not
> >fixed
On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +If the patch introduces a new regression and this regression was not fixed
> +in seven days, then the patch will be reverted.
Those regressions where we know
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +If the patch introduces a new regression and this regression was not fixed
> +in seven days, then the patch will be reverted.
Those regressions where we know which patch caused them are the easy ones.
Often we
Hi all,
Adrian Bunk pisze:
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
Hi all,
Adrian Bunk pisze:
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
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+If the patch introduces a new regression and this regression was not fixed
+in seven days, then the patch will be reverted.
Those regressions where we know which patch caused them are the easy ones.
Often we don't
On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+If the patch introduces a new regression and this regression was not fixed
+in seven days, then the patch will be reverted.
Those regressions where we know which
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 12:22:26PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+If the patch introduces a new regression and this regression was not
fixed
+in seven
On Sunday, 17 June 2007 12:22, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
+If the patch introduces a new regression and this regression was not
fixed
+in seven days,
On Sunday, 17 June 2007 13:47, Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 12:22:26PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+If the patch introduces a new
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 11:41:36AM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
Hi all,
Adrian Bunk pisze:
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
On 17/06/07, Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 11:41:36AM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
Hi all,
Adrian Bunk pisze:
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
Michal Piotrowski wrote:
choose minor evil to prevent a greater one
The measurement of evil is subjective. That's why there are releases
with known regressions.
--
Stefan Richter
-=-=-=== -==- =---=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 02:13:39PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Sunday, 17 June 2007 13:47, Oleg Verych wrote:
[]
It's OK _only_ in case of unknown, hard to find *hardware* bugs.
If you think it's a good thing for bad, untested by developer
code, then something is completely wrong.
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 04:24:30PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 02:13:39PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Sunday, 17 June 2007 13:47, Oleg Verych wrote:
[]
It's OK _only_ in case of unknown, hard to find *hardware* bugs.
If you think it's a good thing for
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 12:22:26PM +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+If the patch introduces a new regression and this
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 10:44:39AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
[]
That's wrong if developers are tending to reply only one thing --
git-bisect.
If things are going to be that bad, then better to start dealing with the
cause, not consequences. In
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
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 07:03:44AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
>...
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:55:16AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:32:36AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>...
> > > For example you feel, that
Hi Stefan,
On 16/06/07, Stefan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[..]
Well, if _other_ subsystems would get regressions in Linus' tree fixed
quicker, there might perhaps be more people who would consider to run
-rc kernels and would catch and report "my" regressions.
[..]
[Adrian, I'm not
Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
[...]
>> This means going through every single point in the regression list
>> asking "Have we tried everything possible to solve this regression?".
[...]
>> And a low hanging fruit to improve the release would be
Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
[...]
This means going through every single point in the regression list
asking Have we tried everything possible to solve this regression?.
[...]
And a low hanging fruit to improve the release would be if you
Hi Stefan,
On 16/06/07, Stefan Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[..]
Well, if _other_ subsystems would get regressions in Linus' tree fixed
quicker, there might perhaps be more people who would consider to run
-rc kernels and would catch and report my regressions.
[..]
[Adrian, I'm not
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 07:03:44AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
...
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:55:16AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:32:36AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
...
For example you feel, that you've
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 not only
[I've added Herbert as former kernel team member in the debian(AFAIK),
sorry, if i'm wrong and you have no opinion on that, Herbert.]
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:55:16AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:32:36AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:32:36AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:20:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm seeing this long (198)
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:20:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
> > > ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
>
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:20:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
> >
> > I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
> > ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
>
> I'm hoping it's not "ended".
>
> IOW, I really don't think we
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
>
> I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
> ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
I'm hoping it's not "ended".
IOW, I really don't think we _resolved_ anything, although the work that
Adrian started is continuing through the wiki
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
I'm hoping it's not ended.
IOW, I really don't think we _resolved_ anything, although the work that
Adrian started is continuing through the wiki and
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:20:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
I'm hoping it's not ended.
IOW, I really don't think we _resolved_ anything,
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:20:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
I'm hoping
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:32:36AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:20:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Oleg Verych wrote:
I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have
[I've added Herbert as former kernel team member in the debian(AFAIK),
sorry, if i'm wrong and you have no opinion on that, Herbert.]
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:55:16AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 03:32:36AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:42:02AM
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:33:38PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
>...
> Also, after i saw Linus' message about doing mostly tools last couple of
> years, i wonder why you, Adrian, didn't think about your tools first,
> before you've started regression tracking? You are not running in front
> of a
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 07:30:49PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 06:39:23PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
[]
> > I know, that most developers here are not working/familiar with what
> > Debian has as its bug shooting weapon ``The system is mainly controlled
> > by e-mail, but
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 06:39:23PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 05:33:40PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
> []
> > [...]
> > > Why you didn't proposed (used) Debian's BTS as alternative to bugzilla,
> > [...]
> >
> > BTS has been mentioned in that thread in a few posts;
Oleg Verych wrote:
> I thought somebody, who familiar with that, might propose to setup/tune
> it, but not doing yet another NIH thing,
I may have missed something, but I recall that Adrian's bugtracking,
while it lasted, and now Michal's continuing it mostly came into being
because Adrian just
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 05:33:40PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
[]
> [...]
> > Why you didn't proposed (used) Debian's BTS as alternative to bugzilla,
> [...]
>
> BTS has been mentioned in that thread in a few posts; mostly positively
> as I recall.
I know, that most developers here are not
Oleg Verych wrote:
> I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
> ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
Direct or indirect results:
- See Michal Piotrowski's periodic posts and
http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions .
- Meanwhile, the people who maintain
El Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 02:52:03PM +0200 Vitez Gabor ha dit:
> I'm running debian etch in linux 2.6.21.[34], and ran into troubles with
> heartbeat:
>
> In some cases, I get "
> Jun 12 13:14:36 sf1 heartbeat[2973]: ERROR: No local heartbeat. Forcing
> restart.
> Jun
Hi,
I'm running debian etch in linux 2.6.21.[34], and ran into troubles with
heartbeat:
In some cases, I get "
Jun 12 13:14:36 sf1 heartbeat[2973]: ERROR: No local heartbeat. Forcing restart.
Jun 12 13:14:36 sf1 heartbeat[2973]: WARN: Late heartbeat: Node sf1: interval
427
* Newsgroups: gmane.linux.kernel
* Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 10:50:22 -0700 (PDT)
* From: Linus Torvalds
>
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>
>> Besides the primary point of bug tracking is not to be friendly
>> to someone, but to (a) fix the bugs and (b) know how many bugs
>> there for a
* Newsgroups: gmane.linux.kernel
* Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 10:50:22 -0700 (PDT)
* From: Linus Torvalds
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
Besides the primary point of bug tracking is not to be friendly
to someone, but to (a) fix the bugs and (b) know how many bugs
there for a given
Hi,
I'm running debian etch in linux 2.6.21.[34], and ran into troubles with
heartbeat:
In some cases, I get
Jun 12 13:14:36 sf1 heartbeat[2973]: ERROR: No local heartbeat. Forcing restart.
Jun 12 13:14:36 sf1 heartbeat[2973]: WARN: Late heartbeat: Node sf1: interval
42740 ms
The heartbeat
El Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 02:52:03PM +0200 Vitez Gabor ha dit:
I'm running debian etch in linux 2.6.21.[34], and ran into troubles with
heartbeat:
In some cases, I get
Jun 12 13:14:36 sf1 heartbeat[2973]: ERROR: No local heartbeat. Forcing
restart.
Jun 12 13:14:36 sf1 heartbeat[2973
Oleg Verych wrote:
I'm seeing this long (198) thread and just have no idea how it has
ended (wiki? hand-mailing?).
Direct or indirect results:
- See Michal Piotrowski's periodic posts and
http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions .
- Meanwhile, the people who maintain
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 05:33:40PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
[]
[...]
Why you didn't proposed (used) Debian's BTS as alternative to bugzilla,
[...]
BTS has been mentioned in that thread in a few posts; mostly positively
as I recall.
I know, that most developers here are not
Oleg Verych wrote:
I thought somebody, who familiar with that, might propose to setup/tune
it, but not doing yet another NIH thing,
I may have missed something, but I recall that Adrian's bugtracking,
while it lasted, and now Michal's continuing it mostly came into being
because Adrian just
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 06:39:23PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 05:33:40PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
[]
[...]
Why you didn't proposed (used) Debian's BTS as alternative to bugzilla,
[...]
BTS has been mentioned in that thread in a few posts; mostly positively
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 07:30:49PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 06:39:23PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
[]
I know, that most developers here are not working/familiar with what
Debian has as its bug shooting weapon ``The system is mainly controlled
by e-mail, but the bug
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:33:38PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
...
Also, after i saw Linus' message about doing mostly tools last couple of
years, i wonder why you, Adrian, didn't think about your tools first,
before you've started regression tracking? You are not running in front
of a train,
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 09:36:24AM +0200, Joerg Sommrey wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:38:34PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 18:39 +0200, Joerg Sommrey wrote:
> > > Here it is. Maybe this problem is related to the usage of the
> > > "experimental" amd76x_pm module?
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 11:19:52AM +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
> On 5/14/07, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 09:18 +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
>
> >I'm sorry... but why are you posting these patches here? Those aren't
> >GPL modules, and thus very offtopic for lkml,
Jeff Chua wrote:
On 5/14/07, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 09:18 +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
I'm sorry... but why are you posting these patches here? Those aren't
GPL modules, and thus very offtopic for lkml, maybe except for if you
want to deliberately have
Jeff Chua wrote:
On 5/14/07, Arjan van de Ven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 09:18 +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
I'm sorry... but why are you posting these patches here? Those aren't
GPL modules, and thus very offtopic for lkml, maybe except for if you
want to deliberately have
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 11:19:52AM +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
On 5/14/07, Arjan van de Ven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 09:18 +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
I'm sorry... but why are you posting these patches here? Those aren't
GPL modules, and thus very offtopic for lkml, maybe
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 09:36:24AM +0200, Joerg Sommrey wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:38:34PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 18:39 +0200, Joerg Sommrey wrote:
Here it is. Maybe this problem is related to the usage of the
experimental amd76x_pm module?
Can
On 5/14/07, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 09:18 +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
I'm sorry... but why are you posting these patches here? Those aren't
GPL modules, and thus very offtopic for lkml, maybe except for if you
want to deliberately have people look at
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 09:18 +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
> Attached are patches for vmware-5.5.3 to make the vmmon and vmnet
> modules compile under Linux-2.6.22-rc1.
I'm sorry... but why are you posting these patches here? Those aren't
GPL modules, and thus very offtopic for lkml, maybe except for
Attached are patches for vmware-5.5.3 to make the vmmon and vmnet
modules compile under Linux-2.6.22-rc1.
Thanks,
Jeff.
--- vmware/vmmon-only/include/compat_kernel.h.org 2006-12-26 16:47:25
+0800
+++ vmware/vmmon-only/include/compat_kernel.h 2006-12-26 16:48:00 +0800
@@ -18,7 +18,9 @@
[David Woodhouse - Sun, May 13, 2007 at 02:50:10PM +0800]
| On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 10:43 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| > Btw David who does release a such snapshots (like git16)? You or
| > Linus?
|
| I do. Not that I've actually had much involvement with it for a while --
| it's mostly done by
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 10:43 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> Btw David who does release a such snapshots (like git16)? You or
> Linus?
I do. Not that I've actually had much involvement with it for a while --
it's mostly done by cron and the script at
http://david.woodhou.se/git-snapshot.sh
--
[David Woodhouse - Sun, May 13, 2007 at 02:26:40PM +0800]
| On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:01 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
| > On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
| > >On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| > >> Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
| >
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:01 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> >> Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
> >> v.2.6.21-git16) were in Linus' git tree too.
> >
> >Then there
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:01 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
v.2.6.21-git16) were in Linus' git tree too.
Then there would be
[David Woodhouse - Sun, May 13, 2007 at 02:26:40PM +0800]
| On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:01 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
| On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
| On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
|
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 10:43 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
Btw David who does release a such snapshots (like git16)? You or
Linus?
I do. Not that I've actually had much involvement with it for a while --
it's mostly done by cron and the script at
http://david.woodhou.se/git-snapshot.sh
--
[David Woodhouse - Sun, May 13, 2007 at 02:50:10PM +0800]
| On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 10:43 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| Btw David who does release a such snapshots (like git16)? You or
| Linus?
|
| I do. Not that I've actually had much involvement with it for a while --
| it's mostly done by
Attached are patches for vmware-5.5.3 to make the vmmon and vmnet
modules compile under Linux-2.6.22-rc1.
Thanks,
Jeff.
--- vmware/vmmon-only/include/compat_kernel.h.org 2006-12-26 16:47:25
+0800
+++ vmware/vmmon-only/include/compat_kernel.h 2006-12-26 16:48:00 +0800
@@ -18,7 +18,9 @@
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 09:18 +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
Attached are patches for vmware-5.5.3 to make the vmmon and vmnet
modules compile under Linux-2.6.22-rc1.
I'm sorry... but why are you posting these patches here? Those aren't
GPL modules, and thus very offtopic for lkml, maybe except for if
On 5/14/07, Arjan van de Ven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 09:18 +0800, Jeff Chua wrote:
I'm sorry... but why are you posting these patches here? Those aren't
GPL modules, and thus very offtopic for lkml, maybe except for if you
want to deliberately have people look at
David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>> Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
>> v.2.6.21-git16) were in Linus' git tree too.
>
> Then there would be _lots_ of tags in the master tree -- I'm not sure we
> want that.
>
> I suppose
[Russell King - Sat, May 12, 2007 at 05:31:41PM +0100]
| On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 08:24:28PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| > [Jan Engelhardt - Sat, May 12, 2007 at 05:01:19PM +0200]
| > |
| > | On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
| > | >On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 08:24:28PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> [Jan Engelhardt - Sat, May 12, 2007 at 05:01:19PM +0200]
> |
> | On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
> | >On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> | >> Actually I think it would be convenient if such
[Jan Engelhardt - Sat, May 12, 2007 at 05:01:19PM +0200]
|
| On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
| >On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| >> Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
| >> v.2.6.21-git16) were in Linus' git tree too.
| >
| >Then
[Jan Engelhardt - Sat, May 12, 2007 at 05:01:19PM +0200]
|
| On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
| >On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| >> Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
| >> v.2.6.21-git16) were in Linus' git tree too.
| >
| >Then
On May 12 2007 21:44, David Woodhouse wrote:
>On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>> Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
>> v.2.6.21-git16) were in Linus' git tree too.
>
>Then there would be _lots_ of tags in the master tree -- I'm not sure we
>want
[David Woodhouse - Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:44:56PM +0800]
| On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| > Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
| > v.2.6.21-git16) were in Linus' git tree too.
|
| Then there would be _lots_ of tags in the master tree -- I'm
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 17:19 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> Actually I think it would be convenient if such tags (like
> v.2.6.21-git16) were in Linus' git tree too.
Then there would be _lots_ of tags in the master tree -- I'm not sure we
want that.
I suppose I could put a tree on kernel.org
[YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@ - Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:03:08PM +0900]
| In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Sat, 12 May 2007 13:19:23 +0200 (MEST)),
Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
|
| > I notice that people refer to certain git snapshots as e.g. -git16;
| > kernel.org does so too.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Sat, 12 May 2007 13:19:23 +0200 (MEST)), Jan
Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
> I notice that people refer to certain git snapshots as e.g. -git16;
> kernel.org does so too. Hovering over the link on kernel.org reveals
>
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 01:19:23PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> Hi list,
>
>
> I notice that people refer to certain git snapshots as e.g. -git16;
> kernel.org does so too. Hovering over the link on kernel.org reveals
> http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/snapshots/patch-2.6.21-git16.bz2
Hi list,
I notice that people refer to certain git snapshots as e.g. -git16;
kernel.org does so too. Hovering over the link on kernel.org reveals
http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/snapshots/patch-2.6.21-git16.bz2
but where do I actually find -git16 in Linus's git tree? git16 is
neither
1 - 100 of 1076 matches
Mail list logo
