On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 03:56:11PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue 2007-11-13 12:50:08, Mark Lord wrote:
> > > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > >
> > > >for example git-bisect was godsent. I remember that
> > > >years ago bisection of a bug was a very
On 18-11-07 15:35, James Bottomley wrote:
>> clean-cg? But failure to run "git repack -a -d" every once in a while?
>
> Actually, the best command is
>
> git gc
>
> which does a repack (into a single pack file rather than an incremenal),
> and then removes all the objects now in the pack. If,
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue 2007-11-13 12:50:08, Mark Lord wrote:
> > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > >for example git-bisect was godsent. I remember that
> > >years ago bisection of a bug was a very laborous task
> > >so that it was only used as a final, last-ditch
> > >ap
On Sun, 2007-11-18 at 13:58 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 18-11-07 13:44, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> > On Tue 2007-11-13 12:50:08, Mark Lord wrote:
>
> >> It's a 540MByte download over a slow link for everyone
> >> else.
> >
> > Hmmm, clean-cg is 7.7G on my machine, and yes I tried
> > git-prune
On 18-11-07 13:44, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2007-11-13 12:50:08, Mark Lord wrote:
>> It's a 540MByte download over a slow link for everyone
>> else.
>
> Hmmm, clean-cg is 7.7G on my machine, and yes I tried
> git-prune-packed. What am I doing wrong?
clean-cg? But failure to run "git repack
On Tue 2007-11-13 12:50:08, Mark Lord wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> >for example git-bisect was godsent. I remember that
> >years ago bisection of a bug was a very laborous task
> >so that it was only used as a final, last-ditch
> >approach for really nasty bugs. Today we can
> >autonomouly
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 10:34:37PM +, Russell King wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 06:25:16PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Given the wide range of ARM platforms today, it is utterly idiotic to
> > > expect a single person to be able to provide responses for all ARM bugs.
> > > I for one wish I
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 06:23:34PM -0500, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> > I don't see any reason that we couldn't have a tool accessible to Ubuntu
> > users that does a real "git bisect". Git is really good at being scripted
> > by fancy GUIs. It should be e
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 06:23:34PM -0500, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> I don't see any reason that we couldn't have a tool accessible to Ubuntu
> users that does a real "git bisect". Git is really good at being scripted
> by fancy GUIs. It should be easy enough to have a drop down with all of
> the
On 15-11-07 14:00, Jörn Engel wrote:
> And even without mails being held hostage for weeks, every single
> moderation mail is annoying. Like the one I'm sure to receive after
> sending this out.
Certainly. Upto this thread I wasn't actually aware the list was doing that.
While it might be inf
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 06:59:34AM +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> Totally unrelated indeed so why are spouting crap? If the kohab list has a
> problem take it up with them but keep ALSA out of it. alsa-devel has only
> ever moderated out spam -- nothing else.
That is incorrect. Hopefully it is the
At Thu, 15 Nov 2007 14:17:27 +0100,
Olivier Galibert wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 06:59:34AM +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> > Totally unrelated indeed so why are spouting crap? If the kohab list has a
> > problem take it up with them but keep ALSA out of it. alsa-devel has only
> > ever moder
On Thu, 15 November 2007 13:26:51 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
>
> Can you please just shelve this crap? You have a way of knowing that "ALSA
> will accept you" and that is knowing or assuming that the ALSA project
> doesn't consist of drooling retards.
Well, my experience with moderation has been
On 15-11-07 13:02, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> I get the same information from both project websites: "moderated for
> non-members, public archives" - no way of knowing that ALSA will accept
> me informing them of something they would be interested without
> committing to reading or bit-bucketing their
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 06:59:34AM +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 15-11-07 05:16, Bron Gondwana wrote:
>
>> Totally unrelated - I sent something to the kolab mailing list a couple
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> I'm sure if I had something that I considered worth informing the ALSA
>> project of, I'd be wary of
On 15-11-07 05:16, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> Totally unrelated - I sent something to the kolab mailing list a couple
[ ... ]
> I'm sure if I had something that I considered worth informing the ALSA
> project of, I'd be wary of spending the same effort writing a good post
> knowing it may be droppe
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:46:24PM +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 14-11-07 11:07, David Miller wrote:
>
> Added Jaroslav and Takashi to the already extensive CC
>
>> From: Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>> So, when are you creating a replacement alsa-devel mailing list on
>>> vger? That's
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Theodore Tso wrote:
> There are two parts to this. One is a Ubuntu development kernel which
> we can give to large numbers of people to expand our testing pool.
> But if we don't do a better job of responding to bug reports that
> would be generated by expanded testing this w
* Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> >
> > * Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > (and this is in no way directed at the networking folks - it holds
> > > > for all of us. I have one main complaint about networkin
From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100
> In fact this thread is the very example: David points out that on netdev
> some of those bugs were already discussed and resolved. Had it been all
> on lkml we'd all be aware of it.
That's a rediculious argument.
One
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> Dumping even more crap on lkml is not the answer.
>
> that "crap" that i'd like to see dumped upon lkml would be netdev
> traffic mainly - most of the other kernel development lists (and i'm
> subscribed to many of them) are low-traffic. netdev is the mai
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 21:37:37 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ok, then you conceded it by not replying to it? good ;-)
No, I don't intend to carry on this discussion,
but I appreciate the smiley.
---
~Randy
___
Linux PCMCIA reimplementation list
http://list
* James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 11:56 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100
> >
> > > In fact this thread is the very example: David points out that on netdev
> > > some of those bugs w
* David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100
>
> > In fact this thread is the very example: David points out that on netdev
> > some of those bugs were already discussed and resolved. Had it been all
> > on lkml we'd
* Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 21:16:39 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > countered by the underlined sentences above, just in case you missed
> > it.
>
> I didn't miss your claim.
ok, then you conceded it by not replying to it? good ;-)
Ingo
__
* Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > so please stop this "too busy and too noisy" nonsense already. It
> > was nonsense 10 years ago and it's nonsense today. In 10 years the
> > kernel grew from a 1 million lines codebase to an 8 million lines
> > codebase, so what? Deal with it and b
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 21:16:39 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> countered by the underlined sentences above, just in case you missed it.
I didn't miss your claim.
---
~Randy
___
Linux PCMCIA reimplementation list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/
On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 11:56 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100
>
> > In fact this thread is the very example: David points out that on netdev
> > some of those bugs were already discussed and resolved. Had it been all
> > on
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 01:24:48PM +, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > Suspend to RAM resume hangs on a tickless (NO_HZ) kernel
> > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9275
> > > Kernel: 2.6.23
> > > This is HP notebook nc6320 T2400 945GM
> >
> > No response from developers
>
> May
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 02:07:06AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:55:07 +
>
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 05:55:51PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > > I've created [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > By doing so you've just said (implicitly)
Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 November 2007 00:27, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> You missed the following in my email:
>> "we slowly scare them away due to the many bug reports without any
>> reaction."
>>
>> The problem is that bug reports take time. If you go away from easy
>> things like comp
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 09:38:20AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > so please stop this "too busy and too noisy" nonsense already. It was
> > nonsense 10 years ago and it's nonsense today. In 10 years the kernel
> > grew from a 1 million lines
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:08:47 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > (and this is in no way directed at the networking folks - it holds
> > > for all of us. I have one main complaint about networking: the
> > > separate netdev list is a bad idea - network
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Mark Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> You're assuming that everything in linux-2.6 was downloaded; that's
>>> not true. Everything in linux-2.6/.git was downloaded; but then you
>>> do a checkout which happens to approximately double the size of the
>>> linux-2.6 di
* Mark Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You're assuming that everything in linux-2.6 was downloaded; that's
>> not true. Everything in linux-2.6/.git was downloaded; but then you
>> do a checkout which happens to approximately double the size of the
>> linux-2.6 directory.
> ..
>
> Ah, I wo
FWIW, I see the same problem with another HP notebook, DV4378EA with
radeon X700 video card. It does not happen frequently but I can say
that since I disabled the tickless feature I can't reproduce the
problem anymore.
On Nov 14, 2007 2:24 PM, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > >
* Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > (and this is in no way directed at the networking folks - it holds
> > for all of us. I have one main complaint about networking: the
> > separate netdev list is a bad idea - networking regressions should
> > be discussed and fixed on lkml, like mo
Hi!
> > Suspend to RAM resume hangs on a tickless (NO_HZ) kernel
> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9275
> > Kernel: 2.6.23
> > This is HP notebook nc6320 T2400 945GM
>
> No response from developers
Maybe I'm optimistic, but I expected Ingo/Thomas to look after nohz
problems. nohz=of
At Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:21:30 +0100,
Rene Herman wrote:
>
> On 14-11-07 09:25, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > At Wed, 14 Nov 2007 04:01:31 -0800 (PST),
> > David Miller wrote:
> >> From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 03:56:57 -0800 (PST)
> >>
> >>> The fact that it farts
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:46:20AM -0700, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>> Finally they replied and asked to rediff it against their
>> git tree. I did that and sent patches back. No reply since then.
>>
>> And mind you, the patch is not trying to do anything
>> complex, it mostly m
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:46:20AM -0700, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> Finally they replied and asked to rediff it against their
> git tree. I did that and sent patches back. No reply since then.
>
> And mind you, the patch is not trying to do anything
> complex, it mostly moves code around, removes 'i
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > HID
> >
> > Kernel NULL pointer dereference at :usbhid:hiddev_ioctl+0x2f/0xabc
> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9216
> > Kernel: 2.6.23.1
> > Looks like this is a regres
On 14-11-07 09:25, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Wed, 14 Nov 2007 04:01:31 -0800 (PST),
> David Miller wrote:
>> From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 03:56:57 -0800 (PST)
>>
>>> The fact that it farts at me every time I post to this thread.
>> See? I got another one and I h
At Wed, 14 Nov 2007 04:01:31 -0800 (PST),
David Miller wrote:
>
> From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 03:56:57 -0800 (PST)
>
> > The fact that it farts at me every time I post to this thread.
>
> See? I got another one and I have received at least 10 of the
> followi
On 14-11-07 13:01, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 03:56:57 -0800 (PST)
>
>> The fact that it farts at me every time I post to this thread.
>
> See? I got another one and I have received at least 10 of the
> following over the past 2 days.
On 14-11-07 12:56, David Miller wrote:
> From: Rene Herman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:46:24 +0100
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not subscriber-only. Same as that arm list,
>> it's _moderated_ for non-subscribers and given that I and other moderators
>> have been doing our best
From: Rene Herman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:46:24 +0100
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not subscriber-only. Same as that arm list,
> it's _moderated_ for non-subscribers and given that I and other moderators
> have been doing our best to moderate quickly (I tend to stay logged in to
MAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:57:06 +0100
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your mail to 'Alsa-devel' with the subject
Re: [alsa-devel] [BUG] New Kernel Bugs
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
The reason it is being held:
Too many recipient
On 14-11-07 11:07, David Miller wrote:
Added Jaroslav and Takashi to the already extensive CC
> From: Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> So, when are you creating a replacement alsa-devel mailing list on
>> vger? That's also subscribers-only.
>
> The operative term is "alternative" rather
From: Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:55:07 +
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 05:55:51PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > I've created [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> By doing so you've just said (implicitly) that you can not tolerate
> someone having a different opinion from your ow
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 05:55:51PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:32:01 -0800
>
> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:18:01 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Find some other mailing list; I'm not hosting *nor* am I willi
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 06:27:00PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:55:51 -0800 (PST) David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > I've created [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Let me just say - I'm astonished at how little spam gets though the vger
> lists. Considering how many tim
On Wednesday 14 November 2007 00:27, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> You missed the following in my email:
> "we slowly scare them away due to the many bug reports without any
> reaction."
>
> The problem is that bug reports take time. If you go away from easy
> things like compile errors then even things li
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 05:39:45PM -0700, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 November 2007 10:56, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 12:13:56PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 04:52:32PM +0100, Benoit Boissinot wrote:
> > > > Btw, I used to test every -mm ker
From: Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 06:56:06 +0100
> >
> > > If so, MANITAINERS claims that it is subscribers-only. That would cause
> > > some bug reporters to give up and go away.
> >
> > Find some other mailing list; I'm not hosting *nor* am I willing to run a
> > n
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 06:56:06AM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >
> > > If so, MANITAINERS claims that it is subscribers-only. That would cause
> > > some bug reporters to give up and go away.
> >
> > Find some other mailing list; I'm not hosting *nor* am I willing to run a
> > non-subscribers o
>
> > If so, MANITAINERS claims that it is subscribers-only. That would cause
> > some bug reporters to give up and go away.
>
> Find some other mailing list; I'm not hosting *nor* am I willing to run a
> non-subscribers only mailing list. Period. Not negotiable, so don't even
> try to change
From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:27:00 -0800
> Let me just say - I'm astonished at how little spam gets though the vger
> lists. Considering how many times those email addresses must have been
> added to spam databases.
>
> It must be a lot of work, and whoever i
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:55:51 -0800 (PST) David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've created [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Let me just say - I'm astonished at how little spam gets though the vger
lists. Considering how many times those email addresses must have been
added to spam databases.
It must be a
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:11:36 -0800 Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:52:17 -0500
> Chuck Ebbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 11/13/2007 04:12 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> > >> Bug fixing is not about finding someone to blame, it's about getting the
> > >> bug
From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:32:01 -0800
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:18:01 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Find some other mailing list; I'm not hosting *nor* am I willing to run a
> > non-subscribers only mailing list. Period. Not negotiabl
From: Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:40:33 +
> ARM ep93xx defconfig has been broken since 2.6.23-git1 due to:
>
> drivers/net/arm/ep93xx_eth.c:420: error: implicit declaration of function
> '__netif_rx_schedule_prep'
>
> caused by: [NET]: Make NAPI polling indepe
Please stop cross-posting this thread at least to linux-pcmcia
until your post is relevant to PCMCIA.
Sorry for being a bore. (Not that I don't love reading LKML
discussions, but I found that it took too much time, and now
they're over at linux-pcmcia too! :)
Thank you in advance.
//Peter
From: Mark Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:18:43 -0500
> Mind you, no arguing that this is effective when that poor bloke has
> a day free to download the git-tree and build/reboot a dozen times.
Like the internet, this time spent is beneficial because it's
pushing the work out
On 11/13/2007 04:12 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>> Bug fixing is not about finding someone to blame, it's about getting the
>> bug fixed.
>
> Partly - its also about understanding why the bug occurred and making it
> not happen again.
Very few people think about that part.
_
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 11:57, Gabriel C wrote:
> > The main problem is finding experienced developers who spend time on
> > looking into bug reports.
>
> There are already. IMO the problem is the development model.
>
> There are tons new features in each new kernel release and 'tons new bugs'
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 10:56, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 12:13:56PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 04:52:32PM +0100, Benoit Boissinot wrote:
> > > Btw, I used to test every -mm kernel. But since I've switched distros
> > > (gentoo->ubuntu)
> > > and I
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 07:08, Mark Lord wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ..
>
> > This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational basis_,
> > it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored for
> > years, in favor of the all-too-easy "open source means many eyeballs
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 03:18:07PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> Russell King wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:08:32AM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> >> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> ..
> >>> This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational basis_,
> >>> it's just that these sorts of things h
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
>
>> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
>>>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 22:42:32 -0800 "Natalie Protasevich"
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ..
> with CONFIG_NO_
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:29:54 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:13:19PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 07:32:19PM +, Russell King wrote:
> > >...
> > > There's another issue I want to raise concerning bugzilla. We have the
> > > c
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:13:19PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 07:32:19PM +, Russell King wrote:
> >...
> > There's another issue I want to raise concerning bugzilla. We have the
> > classic case of "not enough people reading bugzilla bugs" - which is one
> > of the big
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:32:01PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:18:01 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 12:52:22PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:32:19 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > The
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:09:37 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:32:01PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:18:01 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 12:52:22PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
> >
> > > > Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 22:42:32 -0800 "Natalie Protasevich"
> > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > ..
> > > > > > > > with CONFIG_NO_HZ and/or
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:24:14 +0100 Jörn Engel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 November 2007 13:56:58 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > It's relatively common that a regression in subsystem A will manifest as a
> > failure in subsystem B, and the report initially lands on the desk of the
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 06:25:16PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Given the wide range of ARM platforms today, it is utterly idiotic to
> > expect a single person to be able to provide responses for all ARM bugs.
> > I for one wish I'd never *VOLUNTEERED* to be a part of the kernel
> > bugzilla, and re
Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Tue, 13 November 2007 15:18:07 -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
>> I just find it weird that something can be known broken for several -rc*
>> kernels before I happen to install it, discover it's broken on my own
>> machine,
>> and then I track it down, fix it, and submit the patch,
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:18:01 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 12:52:22PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:32:19 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > There's another issue I want to raise concerning bugzilla. We have the
>
On Tue, 13 November 2007 13:56:58 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> It's relatively common that a regression in subsystem A will manifest as a
> failure in subsystem B, and the report initially lands on the desk of the
> subsystem B developers.
>
> But that's OK. The subsystem B people are the one
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 12:52:22PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:32:19 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There's another issue I want to raise concerning bugzilla. We have the
> > classic case of "not enough people reading bugzilla bugs" - which is one
> > of
Romano Giannetti wrote:
> This was what I did in my (in the end almost successful) bisecting when
> trying to find the mmc problem (see the thread named "2.6.24-rc1 eat my
> SD card"). This is true in theory, but it has some problem. The "this
> commit does not compile is the easiest and in man git
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:33:58 +0100 Jörn Engel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 November 2007 15:18:07 -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> >
> > I just find it weird that something can be known broken for several -rc*
> > kernels before I happen to install it, discover it's broken on my own
> > mach
On Tuesday, 13 of November 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 01:43:53PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> >
> >> mkdir t
> >> cd t
> >> git clone
> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git
> >> (wait half an hour)
> >> /usr/bin/du -s
On Tue, 13 November 2007 15:18:07 -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
>
> I just find it weird that something can be known broken for several -rc*
> kernels before I happen to install it, discover it's broken on my own
> machine,
> and then I track it down, fix it, and submit the patch, generally all
> with
I jump in this discussion hoping to have some more insight on git and to
report my experience as a tester. I consider myself as half-literate in
this (I am here since 1991, more or less, and I am able to compile a
kernel and even hand-apply a patch, although I am in no way a kernel
programmer).
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 03:13:46PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:26:05PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> ..
>>> If you've been making significant updates to a driver/subsystem,
>>> and people are reporting that it is now broken for them,
>>
>> What are "signif
> Bug fixing is not about finding someone to blame, it's about getting the
> bug fixed.
Partly - its also about understanding why the bug occurred and making it
not happen again.
___
Linux PCMCIA reimplementation list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:32:19 + Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's another issue I want to raise concerning bugzilla. We have the
> classic case of "not enough people reading bugzilla bugs" - which is one
> of the biggest problems with bugzilla. Virtually no one in the ARM
> co
Russell King wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:08:32AM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
>> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> ..
>>> This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational basis_,
>>> it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored for
>>> years, in favor of the all-too-easy "
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:26:05PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
..
>> If you've been making significant updates to a driver/subsystem,
>> and people are reporting that it is now broken for them,
>
> What are "significant updates"?
>
> Sometimes one person makes one small patch and
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 07:32:19PM +, Russell King wrote:
>...
> There's another issue I want to raise concerning bugzilla. We have the
> classic case of "not enough people reading bugzilla bugs" - which is one
> of the biggest problems with bugzilla. Virtually no one in the ARM
> community l
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 07:46:49PM +, Russell King wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 08:30:35PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > There is this silly limit that noone can work more than 168 hours per
> > week on the Linux kernel, and some kernel developers seem to take the
> > liberty of spending
Theodore Tso wrote:
>
> Heh. I hadn't enabled CONFIG_BCM43XX_DEBUG myself, but I just changed
> it for my next kernel build. This is a slightly different issue,
> which is that sometimes _DEBUG options shouldn't be turned on by
> default (because they really trash performance and bloat log size),
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:26:05PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 01:47:10PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
>>> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> ..
>> Another point is that it shifts the work from the few experienced
>> developers to the many users. Users (and voluntary teste
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 08:30:35PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> There is this silly limit that noone can work more than 168 hours per
> week on the Linux kernel, and some kernel developers seem to take the
> liberty of spending even less time on kernel development...
That limit of 168 hours appli
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:08:32AM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ..
> > This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational basis_,
> > it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored for
> > years, in favor of the all-too-easy "open source means many e
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 04:32:07AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> Luckily if the report being ignored isn't chaff, it will show up again
> (and again and again) and this triggers a reprioritization because not
> only is the bug no longer chaff, it also now got a lot of information
> tagged to it so i
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 02:12:57PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 01:47:10PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
>>> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>>> ...
I did bisecting myself, and I know that it costs time and work.
But the first point is the above one that it ma
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 01:47:10PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
>> Adrian Bunk wrote:
..
> Another point is that it shifts the work from the few experienced
> developers to the many users. Users (and voluntary testers) we have
> many, but developer time for debugging bug reports is
1 - 100 of 149 matches
Mail list logo
