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 unsubscr
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 t
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 th
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 conseque
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 complet
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 linu
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 sayin
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".
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 intr
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 don'
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 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
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 sa
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 i
[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) thr
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 _resolved_
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 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 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
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
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 st
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 worki
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 bugzilla.kerne
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.
>
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
* 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 g
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, ma
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 pe
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 non-g
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
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
--
dw
[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 wo
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 tag
[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 there
[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 there
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 th
[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 not
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 whic
[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. H
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
> http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/
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 a
Le Thursday 26 April 2007 22:44:59 Jay Vosburgh, vous avez écrit :
> Chris Snook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Vincent ETIENNE wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Summary :
> >>Got this trace when one network interface come down or up in a 2
> >>interfaces bonding. So far, system seems to surviv
Russell King wrote:
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 12:12:03PM -0400, Robin Getz wrote:
Depending on how TASK_SIZE is defined - it looks like everyone else
forces it to end of memory, except 68k[nommu].
asm-arm/memory.h:#define TASK_SIZE (CONFIG_DRAM_SIZE)
That is one way to handle it. Ha
On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 11:30:53PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote:
> Robin Getz wrote:
> >>Its not an architecture problem. It can effect any board that
> >>has RAM mapped at a large numerical addresses (larger than TASK_SIZE).
> >>So it can effect any non-MMU platform.
> >
> >Depending on how TASK_SIZE
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 12:12:03PM -0400, Robin Getz wrote:
> > > Depending on how TASK_SIZE is defined - it looks like everyone else
> > > forces it to end of memory, except 68k[nommu].
> > >
> > > asm-arm/memory.h:#define TASK_SIZE (CONFIG_DRAM_SIZE)
> >
> > That is one way to handle
> The URL? Well, I'm glad you asked:
>
> http://lguest.ozlabs.org/lguest-2.6.21-269.patch.gz
>
>
No, I have not. Thanks anyway, will try it. Finally. 8-)
But he was talking about me! ;-)
(kidding)
--
Glauber de Oliveira Costa.
"Free as in Freedom"
"The less confident you are, the more s
Rusty Russell wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 00:09 +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
Thanks to everyone who sent bug reports. I've backported all the fixes
and tweaks.
Changes since last 2.6.21 release (254):
The URL? Well, I'm glad you asked:
http://lguest.ozlabs.org/lguest-2.6.21
Sorry, have been out sick, and someone removed me from the cc list,
which didn't help. In response to various bits:
Firstly a general comment - we're about to upgrade versions, which
will ease a few of these issues. I should really finish the creation
of virtual category owners for *all* categori
gt; >>>> than the address range that RAM sits in. So this test fails when
> >>>> it shouldn't.
Put the patch back, since I added some new cc'
> diff -Naur linux-2.6.21/fs/namei.c linux-2.6.21-uc0/fs/namei.c
> --- linux-2.6.21/fs/namei.c 2007-0
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 00:09 +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Thanks to everyone who sent bug reports. I've backported all the fixes
> and tweaks.
>
> Changes since last 2.6.21 release (254):
The URL? Well, I'm glad you asked:
http://lguest.ozlabs.org/lguest-2.6.21-269.patch.gz
Cheers,
Ru
Thanks to everyone who sent bug reports. I've backported all the fixes
and tweaks.
Changes since last 2.6.21 release (254):
1) Method for building launcher with out-of-tree build (patch from Tony Breeds)
2) SIOCBRADDIF definition for older libc headers (report by Wang Cong)
3) Warning suppressio
Robin Getz wrote:
On Thu 3 May 2007 07:03, Greg Ungerer pondered:
Robin Getz wrote:
On Wed 2 May 2007 07:32, Greg Ungerer pondered:
Robin Getz wrote:
I was trying to understand why we don't want to do the same checking on
noMMU?
The problem is on systems that have RAM mapped at high physical
On Thu 3 May 2007 07:03, Greg Ungerer pondered:
> Robin Getz wrote:
> > On Wed 2 May 2007 07:32, Greg Ungerer pondered:
> >> Robin Getz wrote:
> >>> I was trying to understand why we don't want to do the same checking on
> >>> noMMU?
> >>
> >> The problem is on systems that have RAM mapped at high
Robin Getz wrote:
On Wed 2 May 2007 07:32, Greg Ungerer pondered:
Robin Getz wrote:
On Wed 2 May 2007 01:23, Greg Ungerer pondered:
diff -Naur linux-2.6.21/fs/namei.c linux-2.6.21-uc0/fs/namei.c
--- linux-2.6.21/fs/namei.c 2007-05-01 17:12:53.0 +1000
+++ linux-2.6.21-uc0/fs
On Wed 2 May 2007 07:32, Greg Ungerer pondered:
> Robin Getz wrote:
> > On Wed 2 May 2007 01:23, Greg Ungerer pondered:
> >> diff -Naur linux-2.6.21/fs/namei.c linux-2.6.21-uc0/fs/namei.c
> >> --- linux-2.6.21/fs/namei.c 2007-05-01 17:12:53.00000 +1000
> >
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 09:40:07PM +0200, Diego Calleja wrote:
> So far, it seems that most of people's opinion WRT to bug reporting and
> trackingcan
> be divided into 2 groups:
>
> - People who argues (and they're right) that bugzilla and web interfaces in
> general
> suck and that email + a
switching to
the generic irq code.
http://www.uclinux.org/pub/uClinux/uClinux-2.6.x/linux-2.6.21-uc0.patch.gz
Greg:
Is is possible to split out the m68k stuff from the generic nommu stuff?
I could do that. Usually the actual mm changes have been
a pretty small set of this. Often only 1 or 2 patches
Hi Christoph,
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 03:23:33PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote:
Hi All,
An update of the uClinux (MMU-less) code against 2.6.21.
A lot of cleanups, and a few bug fixes.
Any chance you could split this into a few patches and send
upstream? m68knommu has g
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 03:23:33PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> An update of the uClinux (MMU-less) code against 2.6.21.
> A lot of cleanups, and a few bug fixes.
Any chance you could split this into a few patches and send
upstream? m68knommu has gone quite badly out of sync once agai
hing to
> the generic irq code.
>
> http://www.uclinux.org/pub/uClinux/uClinux-2.6.x/linux-2.6.21-uc0.patch.gz
Greg:
Is is possible to split out the m68k stuff from the generic nommu stuff? (or
maybe I am missing the point of this patch? - it is for review/inclusion into
the -mm tree, or
/linux-2.6.21-uc0.patch.gz
Change log:
. Arctururs UC5272 and UC5282 board supportDavid Wu
. use THREAD_SIZE for stack manipulation Philippe De Muyter
. remove dead code from setup.cGreg Ungerer
. remove dead cache code from mm Greg Ungerer
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 you please verify what happens w/o that module ?
>
After reboo
On Monday, 30 April 2007 08:30, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 00:09:06 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, 29 April 2007 22:52, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 10:18:10PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > [For example, yo
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 you please verify what happens w/o that module ?
Thanks,
tglx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linu
On Mon, April 30, 2007 8:57 pm, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> I never expected the reality to be come as white as my ideal or the
> washed things in washing powder ads.
This reminds me very much of what the brilliant computing scientist Edsger
W. Dijkstra more than once wrote:
`Confusing "love of perfecti
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 11:20:46AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >
> > My ideal was always that reported bugs should be fixed.
>
> ..and this is where we differ.
>
> OF COURSE bugs should be fixed. But you seem to think that there is
> something
I would ask Linus and the list maintainers to stop
the main thread.
When Linus posts a release, then I expect
that threads pertain to this release and not
start some sort of flame war.
If I have a problem with 2.6.21 (or any 2.x.x), I do
not expect to have to go through 100+ mails to
see if a prob
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Ponder that, grasshopper. And until you can see that things are not
> "either-or", "black-and-white", "all or nothing", I don't think I really
> can have anything worthwhile to add in this discussion to you. People who
> think in absolutes are simp
On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 09:53:20PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 02:13:08PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >...
> > (I've said this before, but I'll say it again: one thing that would
> > already make bugzilla better is to just always drop any bug reports that
> > are more t
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> My ideal was always that reported bugs should be fixed.
..and this is where we differ.
OF COURSE bugs should be fixed. But you seem to think that there is
something magical and special about every single bug-report.
You have a new home assignment:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 12:01:38AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>...
> If bugs should be reported to the mailing list, then they
> should just get rid of bugzilla because it's aparently
> serving as a garbage bin.
The first question is not "Bugzilla" but "Does bug tracking make sense?".
Many bug re
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 02:24:03PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > >
> > > Kernel bugzilla has 1600 open bugs BECAUSE IT SUCKS.
> >
> > OK, how do you suggest to track bugs in a way that doesn't suck?
>
> I've tried to explain.
>
> Bugzilla can b
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 03:15:42PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
This means we need people who figure out who to assign bugs too.
Aka bugmasters.
BTW one big problem in our current bugzilla is that a lot of people
cannot reassign bugs they don't own. I somet
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 06:23:36PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 14:52 +0200, Joerg Sommrey wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > after switching to 2.6.21 the system clock sporadically loses time on my
> > box (i386, Athlon MP).
> > It's always around 4.68 seconds and happened 7 time
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 14:52 +0200, Joerg Sommrey wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> after switching to 2.6.21 the system clock sporadically loses time on my
> box (i386, Athlon MP).
> It's always around 4.68 seconds and happened 7 times in the last 12
> hours. A simple calculation (2 ^ ACPI_PM_MASK / PMTMR_TIC
On Monday 30 April 2007, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
>For I somehow feel that most people here dislike bugzilla because of
>misconceptions - which only arose as bugzilla.kernel.org is *really*
>misconfigured.
Bugzilla was indeed miss-conceived. It shoulda been on birth control pills.
I'm not claim
Hi all,
after switching to 2.6.21 the system clock sporadically loses time on my
box (i386, Athlon MP).
It's always around 4.68 seconds and happened 7 times in the last 12
hours. A simple calculation (2 ^ ACPI_PM_MASK / PMTMR_TICKS_PER_SEC =
2 ^ 24 / 3579545 = 4.686968875) shows: There is almost
Johannes Stezenbach wrote :
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 01:33:16PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > On Sun, 29 Apr 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The kernel Bugzilla currently contains 1600 open bugs.
> > >
> > > Adrian, why do you keep harpi
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007, Theodore Tso wrote:
>
> Folks might want to take a look at the Debian Bug Tracking System
> (BTS). It has a web interface which you can use to query history, but
> *everything* is e-mail driven, and the way you submit, close, update,
> tag/classfy bugs --- everything --- is
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, Indan Zupancic wrote:
> I don't know, but what about telling the hapless person who went
> through the process of posting a bug what's wrong with the bug report?
It's a tedious process you keep doing over and over and over and over again,
and my experience shows it's sheer lu
On 29 Apr 2007, at 22:24, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Exactly because I don't think anybody has shown any better
automation than
bugzilla. But that doesn't make bugzilla "the One Choice". That's
not how
it works. If there is no automation, manual tracking is still
better than
*crap* automation.
(various cc's reestablished. Please don't remove cc's when dealing with
kernel people).
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 06:57:08 +0200 Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > If it is considered useful it shouldn't be a problem to automatically
> > forwar
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> What works is somebody who is a bugmaster, and it doesn't really matter
> *what* bug tracker he points to (bugzilla being one of the possibilities,
> although not necessarily the best, and absolutely NOT the only choice),
> and turn them into emails.
From: Tomasz Chmielewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 08:09:13 +0200
> Why didn't you do it then? Why didn't you send your patch to the main
> developer?
> Wouldn't be your problem fixed if you did it?
Because all the directions say to report bugs to the bugzilla via
bugs.freedeskt
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 00:09:06 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 April 2007 22:52, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 10:18:10PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > [For example, you can create a bugzilla entry with a link to the lkml.org
> > >
1 - 100 of 539 matches
Mail list logo
