On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 11:10:28PM +1100, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:53:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > umm, really you want
> > /proc/sys/vm/dont-account-highmem-in-dirty-memory-calculations, only
> > shorter.
> >
> > Do you agree
On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:53:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:24:24 +1100 "Bron Gondwana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:54:28 -0800, "Andrew Morton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > said:
> > &g
On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:53:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:24:24 +1100 Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:54:28 -0800, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 14:42:04 +1100 Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 11:10:28PM +1100, Bron Gondwana wrote:
On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:53:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
umm, really you want
/proc/sys/vm/dont-account-highmem-in-dirty-memory-calculations, only
shorter.
Do you agree?
I still read dirty_highmem as:
/proc/sys
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:54:28 -0800, "Andrew Morton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 14:42:04 +1100 Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > /*
> > + * free highmem will not be subtracted from the total free memory
> > +
On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:53:17AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> >
> > This patch includes some code cleanup from Linus and a toggle in
> > /proc/sys/vm/dirty_highmem which can be set to 1 to add the highmem
> > b
On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:53:17AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
This patch includes some code cleanup from Linus and a toggle in
/proc/sys/vm/dirty_highmem which can be set to 1 to add the highmem
back to the total available memory count
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:54:28 -0800, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 14:42:04 +1100 Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
/*
+ * free highmem will not be subtracted from the total free memory
+ * for calculating free ratios if vm_dirty_highmem is true
t to 1 to add the highmem
back to the total available memory count.
Signed-off-by: Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.23.8-reiserfix-fai-vmdirty/mm/page-writeback.c
===
--- linux-2.6.23.8-reiserfix-fai-vmdirty
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 10:51:15AM +1100, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 08:32:22AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > If this patch makes a difference, please holler. I think it's the correct
> > thing to do, but I'm not going to actually commit it without someb
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 08:32:22AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> >
> > I guess we'll be doing the one-liner kernel mod and testing
> > that then.
>
> The thing to look at is "get_dirty_limits()" in mm/page-writeb
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 08:32:22AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
I guess we'll be doing the one-liner kernel mod and testing
that then.
The thing to look at is get_dirty_limits() in mm/page-writeback.c, and
in this particular case it's
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 10:51:15AM +1100, Bron Gondwana wrote:
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 08:32:22AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
If this patch makes a difference, please holler. I think it's the correct
thing to do, but I'm not going to actually commit it without somebody
saying
count.
Signed-off-by: Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.23.8-reiserfix-fai-vmdirty/mm/page-writeback.c
===
--- linux-2.6.23.8-reiserfix-fai-vmdirty.orig/mm/page-writeback.c
2007-11-22 01:48:20.0 +
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 01:14:32PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Sorry about not replying to this earlier. I actually got a weekend
away from the computer pretty much last weekend - took the kids
swimming, helped a friend clear dead wood from around her house
before the fire season. Shocking I
On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 04:13:18PM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Thursday 15 November 2007 14:24, Rob Mueller wrote:
> > > That's my personal opinion, and I realize that some of the
> > > commercial vendors may care about their insane customers'
> > > satisfaction, but I'm simply not
On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 04:13:18PM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote:
On Thursday 15 November 2007 14:24, Rob Mueller wrote:
That's my personal opinion, and I realize that some of the
commercial vendors may care about their insane customers'
satisfaction, but I'm simply not interested in
On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 01:14:32PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Sorry about not replying to this earlier. I actually got a weekend
away from the computer pretty much last weekend - took the kids
swimming, helped a friend clear dead wood from around her house
before the fire season. Shocking I
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
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 09:53:38PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > So even at 100% dirty limits, it won't let you dirty more than 1GB on the
> > default 32-bit setup.
>
> Side note: all of these are obviously still just heuristics. If you
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 09:53:38PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
So even at 100% dirty limits, it won't let you dirty more than 1GB on the
default 32-bit setup.
Side note: all of these are obviously still just heuristics. If you really
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 spending
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 08:24:53PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> >
> > And congratulations to him for that. We almost entirely dropped 2.6.16,
> > but there's a regression some time since then that makes large MM
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 10:56:01PM +0100, Christian Kujau wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> There are a number of process things we _could_ do. Like
>> - have bugfix-only kernel releases
>
> Adrian Bunk does (did?) this with 2.6.16.x, although it always seemed to me
> like an
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?
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 also
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 10:56:01PM +0100, Christian Kujau wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
There are a number of process things we _could_ do. Like
- have bugfix-only kernel releases
Adrian Bunk does (did?) this with 2.6.16.x, although it always seemed to me
like an
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 08:24:53PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
And congratulations to him for that. We almost entirely dropped 2.6.16,
but there's a regression some time since then that makes large MMAPed
files a major pain (specifically
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 11:54:41PM -0400, Scott Thompson wrote:
> Many free (and not-free) mail clients wordwrap. Hushmail wraps at
> 68 (verified), Yahoo has options to wrap at a max of 99, and Gmail
> was somewhere around 85-90 as I recall. Not sure on other free /
> inexpensive clients.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 11:54:41PM -0400, Scott Thompson wrote:
Many free (and not-free) mail clients wordwrap. Hushmail wraps at
68 (verified), Yahoo has options to wrap at a max of 99, and Gmail
was somewhere around 85-90 as I recall. Not sure on other free /
inexpensive clients.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:39:07AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> If GPLv3 were to have a clause that permitted combination/linking with
> code under GPLv2, this wouldn't be enough for GPLv3 projects to use
> Linux code, and it wouldn't be enough for Linux code to use GPLv3
> projects. That's
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 08:23:57PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 21, 2007, "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > Wouldn't that defeat the entire purpose of the GPLv3? Couldn't
> >> > I take any
> >> > GPLv3 program, combine it with a few lines of Linux code, and
> >> >
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 03:26:15PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> > Second, Oracle is now working on Btrfs (if ever a FS needed a better
> > name... is that pronounced ButterFS?).
>
> (In our silliest moments, yes. Absolutely.)
I'm sure when the PHBen are around it's "Better FS".
It's all a
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 03:26:15PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
Second, Oracle is now working on Btrfs (if ever a FS needed a better
name... is that pronounced ButterFS?).
(In our silliest moments, yes. Absolutely.)
I'm sure when the PHBen are around it's Better FS.
It's all a
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:39:07AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
If GPLv3 were to have a clause that permitted combination/linking with
code under GPLv2, this wouldn't be enough for GPLv3 projects to use
Linux code, and it wouldn't be enough for Linux code to use GPLv3
projects. That's
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 08:23:57PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 21, 2007, David Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wouldn't that defeat the entire purpose of the GPLv3? Couldn't
I take any
GPLv3 program, combine it with a few lines of Linux code, and
Tivoize the
result?
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:10:42PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Jun 18, 2007, at 13:56:05, Bryan Henderson wrote:
>>> The question remains is where to implement versioning: directly in
>>> individual filesystems or in the vfs code so all filesystems can use it?
>>
>> Or not in the kernel at
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:10:42PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
On Jun 18, 2007, at 13:56:05, Bryan Henderson wrote:
The question remains is where to implement versioning: directly in
individual filesystems or in the vfs code so all filesystems can use it?
Or not in the kernel at all. I've
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:03:40PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> So you're arguing two sides of no argument at all.
Yeah, pretty much. I take back my arguments in the previous
couple of my posts up this thread. They don't actually hold
together! Sorry for wasting your time correct me.
Bron.
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:32:38AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 03:45:24AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > Too bad everyone is spending time on 10 similar-but-slightly-different
> > filesystems. This will likely end up with a bunch of filesystems that
> > implement some
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 07:45:38PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > To be fair here, this could also be accomplished by having to flip a
> > physical switch on the router, especially if you did something funky
> >
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 07:45:38PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
To be fair here, this could also be accomplished by having to flip a
physical switch on the router, especially if you did something funky
like:
[---] push this button
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:32:38AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 03:45:24AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
Too bad everyone is spending time on 10 similar-but-slightly-different
filesystems. This will likely end up with a bunch of filesystems that
implement some easy
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 01:03:40PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
So you're arguing two sides of no argument at all.
Yeah, pretty much. I take back my arguments in the previous
couple of my posts up this thread. They don't actually hold
together! Sorry for wasting your time correct me.
Bron.
-
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 04:58:40PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >Let's say I'm the owner of a company selling some device that uses a
> >GPLv2 OS and some GPLv2 applications to do the job. Let's say that for
> >some reason I don't want the
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:58:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> >
> > No, I'm arguing that it's not "mere aggregation" - the kernel is useless
> > on that machine unless the BIOS is present or replaced wi
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 02:38:43AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ah, but giving the user half the key doesn't mean they still don't have
> > access
> > to the entire key. QED: Giving people half the key won't cut it under the
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:58:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> >
> > No, I'm arguing that it's not "mere aggregation" - the kernel is useless
> > on that machine unless the BIOS is present or replaced with som
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:58:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
No, I'm arguing that it's not mere aggregation - the kernel is useless
on that machine unless the BIOS is present or replaced with something
else with equivalent functionality
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 02:38:43AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 17, 2007, Daniel Hazelton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, but giving the user half the key doesn't mean they still don't have
access
to the entire key. QED: Giving people half the key won't cut it under the
GPLv3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:58:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Bron Gondwana wrote:
No, I'm arguing that it's not mere aggregation - the kernel is useless
on that machine unless the BIOS is present or replaced with something
else with equivalent functionality
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 04:58:40PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Jesper Juhl [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Let's say I'm the owner of a company selling some device that uses a
GPLv2 OS and some GPLv2 applications to do the job. Let's say that for
some reason I don't want the end users
[note: I'm writting this while offline and likely to remain so for the
next 8 hours or so, so I'll probably miss a bunch of other replies]
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 02:14:29PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat,
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:22:21AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > because it could easily be argued that they linked the BIOS with the
> > Linux kernel
>
> How so?
(I'm going to refer to Lin
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:24:08AM -0300, Tomas Neme wrote:
>> 1) What is "tat"?
>>
>> 2) How can I get some?
>>
>> 3) Where do I go to trade it in?
>
> 4) is it legal to consume it in my country?
>
> 5) should I have a designed driver when I do?
6) Is that allowed to be a binary-only driver or
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:24:08AM -0300, Tomas Neme wrote:
1) What is tat?
2) How can I get some?
3) Where do I go to trade it in?
4) is it legal to consume it in my country?
5) should I have a designed driver when I do?
6) Is that allowed to be a binary-only driver or
does it have
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:22:21AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
because it could easily be argued that they linked the BIOS with the
Linux kernel
How so?
(I'm going to refer to Linux as GPLix from here on since this argument
[note: I'm writting this while offline and likely to remain so for the
next 8 hours or so, so I'll probably miss a bunch of other replies]
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 02:14:29PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 16, 2007, Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:22
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:26:34PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What happens if you're debugging something you think is a bug in the
> > Linux kernel and then you run bang into some interactions that ma
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 02:38:41AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > #define Dell CFG_FAVOURITE_VENDOR
>
> > A Dell desktop machine is a piece of hardware. The manufacturer has the
> > source
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 02:38:41AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#define Dell CFG_FAVOURITE_VENDOR
A Dell desktop machine is a piece of hardware. The manufacturer has the
source code (hypothetically) to the BIOS. The BIOS
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:26:34PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What happens if you're debugging something you think is a bug in the
Linux kernel and then you run bang into some interactions that make you
think the bug might
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 01:50:04AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> the GPL applies to software. It is a software license.
>
> the Tivo box is a piece of hardware.
>
> a disk is put into it with software copied to it already: a bootloader,
> a Linux kernel plus a handful of applications. The free
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 05:25:19PM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On 6/14/07, Dave Neuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 6/14/07, Lennart Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Nothing prevents you from taking tivos kernel
>> > changes and building your own hardware to run that code on, and as
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:14:21AM -0400, Robin Getz wrote:
> - gambling devices - which must have their software certified by various
> government agencies - to make sure that the odds are known, and there are no
> backdoors, and consumers don't get screwed - the manufacture can not allow
>
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 01:58:26AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Bron Gondwana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Tivo gets sick of the endless flamewars on lkml, signs a copy
> > of QNX, pushes it out to the hardware. No more Linux on Tivo.
>
&g
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 01:58:26AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 14, 2007, Bron Gondwana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tivo gets sick of the endless flamewars on lkml, signs a copy
of QNX, pushes it out to the hardware. No more Linux on Tivo.
What do we lose?
Do we actually get any
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:14:21AM -0400, Robin Getz wrote:
- gambling devices - which must have their software certified by various
government agencies - to make sure that the odds are known, and there are no
backdoors, and consumers don't get screwed - the manufacture can not allow
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 05:25:19PM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On 6/14/07, Dave Neuer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/14/07, Lennart Sorensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nothing prevents you from taking tivos kernel
changes and building your own hardware to run that code on, and as such
the
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 01:50:04AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
the GPL applies to software. It is a software license.
the Tivo box is a piece of hardware.
a disk is put into it with software copied to it already: a bootloader,
a Linux kernel plus a handful of applications. The free software
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 02:52:48AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > What if TiVo had put the kernel in a burned-in ROM (not flash, or on a
> > flash ROM with no provision for reprogramming it)? Would that also
> > violate the "spirit" of the GPL? Must any device that wishes to include
> > GPL code
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 02:52:48AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
What if TiVo had put the kernel in a burned-in ROM (not flash, or on a
flash ROM with no provision for reprogramming it)? Would that also
violate the spirit of the GPL? Must any device that wishes to include
GPL code include
On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 11:03:48AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Tarkan Erimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > (*) And I've been pushing for that since before they even released
> > > it - I walked out on Bill Joy at a private event where they
> > > discussed their horrible previous Java
On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 11:03:48AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Tarkan Erimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(*) And I've been pushing for that since before they even released
it - I walked out on Bill Joy at a private event where they
discussed their horrible previous Java license.
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 05:13:47PM +1100, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 05:41:13PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > New drivers since 2.6.16.39:
> > - Areca ARC11X0/ARC12X0 SATA-RAID support
> > - AMD Athlon64/FX and Opteron temperature sensor
>
> Sorry -
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 05:13:47PM +1100, Bron Gondwana wrote:
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 05:41:13PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
New drivers since 2.6.16.39:
- Areca ARC11X0/ARC12X0 SATA-RAID support
- AMD Athlon64/FX and Opteron temperature sensor
Sorry - I think I just sent a blank reply
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 03:14:25PM -0600, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:46:09PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> > > That's not the point. The point is that Debian/unstable as of _this
> > > morning_ doesn't work. For reference, I'm running both the latest
> > > releases of both hal
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 03:14:25PM -0600, Matt Mackall wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:46:09PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
That's not the point. The point is that Debian/unstable as of _this
morning_ doesn't work. For reference, I'm running both the latest
releases of both hal
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 12:57:50AM +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
> Now, let us assume that the data device takes 90% of the disk space, and
> the meta-data device the other 10%. When the data device gets full, the
> meta-data blocks will be using the half of the meta-data device, and the
>
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 12:57:50AM +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
Now, let us assume that the data device takes 90% of the disk space, and
the meta-data device the other 10%. When the data device gets full, the
meta-data blocks will be using the half of the meta-data device, and the
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 05:41:13PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> New drivers since 2.6.16.39:
> - Areca ARC11X0/ARC12X0 SATA-RAID support
> - AMD Athlon64/FX and Opteron temperature sensor
Sorry - I think I just sent a blank reply to this! Oops.
I was going to say - thanks. We'll definitely be
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 05:41:13PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> New drivers since 2.6.16.39:
> - Areca ARC11X0/ARC12X0 SATA-RAID support
> - AMD Athlon64/FX and Opteron temperature sensor
>
>
> Location:
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/
>
> git tree:
>
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 05:41:13PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
New drivers since 2.6.16.39:
- Areca ARC11X0/ARC12X0 SATA-RAID support
- AMD Athlon64/FX and Opteron temperature sensor
Location:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/
git tree:
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 05:41:13PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
New drivers since 2.6.16.39:
- Areca ARC11X0/ARC12X0 SATA-RAID support
- AMD Athlon64/FX and Opteron temperature sensor
Sorry - I think I just sent a blank reply to this! Oops.
I was going to say - thanks. We'll definitely be
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 08:02:37AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> reiserfs:
> commit de14569f94513279e3d44d9571a421e9da1759ae
> [PATCH] resierfs: avoid tail packing if an inode was ever mmapped
> backport to 2.6.16 required
Which would explain the "notail" I've been careful to cargo-cult
into
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 08:02:37AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
reiserfs:
commit de14569f94513279e3d44d9571a421e9da1759ae
[PATCH] resierfs: avoid tail packing if an inode was ever mmapped
backport to 2.6.16 required
Which would explain the notail I've been careful to cargo-cult
into every
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 06:36:48PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
> >
> > I believe our featherless leader said he though it was an ancient bug,
> > exasperated by something that went into 2.6.19.
> >
> > If Linus's opinion is correct (still?), then
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 06:36:48PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Mark Lord wrote:
I believe our featherless leader said he though it was an ancient bug,
exasperated by something that went into 2.6.19.
If Linus's opinion is correct (still?), then the bug exists
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 04:04:48PM -0500, Mike Houston wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:30:00 -0500
> Chuck Ebbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Is there any way to estimate the size of the user base for 2.6.16?
> >
> > e.g. how many downloads does it get?
>
> I've often wondered that myself,
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 04:04:48PM -0500, Mike Houston wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:30:00 -0500
Chuck Ebbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any way to estimate the size of the user base for 2.6.16?
e.g. how many downloads does it get?
I've often wondered that myself, as I'm
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 05:51:32PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> OS distro used:
> CentOS 4.4 x86_64
> Kernel 2.6.19 with hand-crafted config, that we are
> able to use successfully with kernel 2.6.16.20.
What patches were you applying to 2.6.16.20, since that didn't
have an Areca driver in
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 05:51:32PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OS distro used:
CentOS 4.4 x86_64
Kernel 2.6.19 with hand-crafted config, that we are
able to use successfully with kernel 2.6.16.20.
What patches were you applying to 2.6.16.20, since that didn't
have an Areca driver in it I
On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 11:34:23AM +0800, erich wrote:
> Dear Maurice Volaski,
>
> Please update Areca Firmware version into 1.42.
> Areca's firmware team found some problems on high capacity transfer.
> Hope the weird phenomenon should disappear.
Erich, is there anyone at Areca that you can
On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 11:34:23AM +0800, erich wrote:
Dear Maurice Volaski,
Please update Areca Firmware version into 1.42.
Areca's firmware team found some problems on high capacity transfer.
Hope the weird phenomenon should disappear.
Erich, is there anyone at Areca that you can pass on
). It's fixed in generic_write,
so we take the few percent performance hit for something that doesn't
break!
Bron.
--
Bron Gondwana
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
patch-2.6.12.2-reiserfix.bz2
Description: Binary data
.
--
Bron Gondwana
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
patch-2.6.12.2-reiserfix.bz2
Description: Binary data
96 matches
Mail list logo
