On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 04:15:41PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> There are also 265 commits in next-20150209 that didn't make it into
> v4.0-rc1.
>
> Top ten first word of commit summary:
>
> 25 rcu
> 24 arm
> 20 selftests
> 19 mm
> 11 arm-soc
> 6 documentatio
Le 24/02/15 11:49, François Valenduc a écrit :
> Le 24/02/15 08:40, Christian Borntraeger a écrit :
>> Am 24.02.2015 um 03:34 schrieb Mike Galbraith:
>>> On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 16:43 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
Am 23.02.2015 um 04:06 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
> .. let's see how much,
Le 24/02/15 08:40, Christian Borntraeger a écrit :
> Am 24.02.2015 um 03:34 schrieb Mike Galbraith:
>> On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 16:43 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>> Am 23.02.2015 um 04:06 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
.. let's see how much, if anything, breaks due to the version number.
P
Am 24.02.2015 um 03:34 schrieb Mike Galbraith:
> On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 16:43 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> Am 23.02.2015 um 04:06 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
>>> .. let's see how much, if anything, breaks due to the version number.
>>> Probably less than during the 3.0 timeframe, but I can jus
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 16:43 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am 23.02.2015 um 04:06 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
> > .. let's see how much, if anything, breaks due to the version number.
> > Probably less than during the 3.0 timeframe, but I can just imagine
> > somebody checking for meaningful ver
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> There are also 265 commits in next-20150209 that didn't make it into
> v4.0-rc1.
>
> Top ten first word of commit summary:
>
> 25 rcu
> 24 arm
> 20 selftests
> 19 mm
> 11 arm-soc
> 6 documentation
>
Am 23.02.2015 um 04:06 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
> .. let's see how much, if anything, breaks due to the version number.
> Probably less than during the 3.0 timeframe, but I can just imagine
> somebody checking for meaningful versions.
>
> Because the people have spoken, and while most of it was com
On Mon, 23 Feb 2015, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> On 02/23/15 04:06, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On the other hand, the strongest argument for some people advocating
> > 4.0 seems to have been a wish to see 4.1.15 - because "that was the
> > version of Linux skynet used for the T-800 terminator".
>
>
On 02/23/15 04:06, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On the other hand, the strongest argument for some people advocating
4.0 seems to have been a wish to see 4.1.15 - because "that was the
version of Linux skynet used for the T-800 terminator".
So they have changed our future already as we will likely hit
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:15 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As usual, the executive friendly graph is at
> http://neuling.org/linux-next-size.html :-)
>
> I haven't done these for a while, so I haven't included a previous
> release for comparison.
>
> (No merge commits counted, next-201
Hi Linus,
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> Because the people have spoken, and while most of it was complete
> gibberish, numbers don't lie. People preferred 4.0, and 4.0 it shall
> be. Unless somebody can come up with a good argument against it.
Thanks for the release we
Hi all,
As usual, the executive friendly graph is at
http://neuling.org/linux-next-size.html :-)
I haven't done these for a while, so I haven't included a previous
release for comparison.
(No merge commits counted, next-20150209 was the last linux-next before
the merge window opened.)
Commits i
12 matches
Mail list logo
