Am Montag, den 30.04.2007, 01:00 +0200 schrieb Uwe Bugla: > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 14:19:22 -0700 (PDT) > Von: Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > An: Uwe Bugla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: Re: Critical points about kernel 2.6.21 and pseudo-authorities > > > > > > > On Sun, 29 Apr 2007, Uwe Bugla wrote: > > > > > > I have been trying diff and other tools in various variants (except > > > git-bisect that I cannot handle because I do not understand the practice > > > of it). > > > > git bisect is _really_ simple if you already have a git tree anyway. And > > even if you don't, getting one isn't really hard either. Just do > > > > git clone > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git > > linux-2.6 > > > > and you have a tree (it will take a little while - it's going to dowload > > about 170MB or so of stuff, so the initial clone is going to be a bit > > painful unless you have a fast internet connection). > > > > Once you have the git tree, assuming that 2.6.21-rc7 worked for you, it's > > really as easy as just saying > > > > git bisect start > > git bisect good v2.6.21-rc7 > > git bisect bad v2.6.21 > > > > and git will think for a short while (most of the time is going to be > > checking out the new tree) and give you a tree to test. > > > > Just build, boot, and test that tree. > > > > If it was fine, do > > > > git bisect good > > > > and git will pick a new tree to test. And if it wasn't, instead just do > > "git bisect bad", and git will pick _another_ version to test. Do this a > > few times, and git will tell you which commit introduced them. > > > > There were just 125 commits in between 2.6.21-rc7 and the final one, so it > > should be quite quick - bisection basically does a binary search, so doing > > seven reboots should have you with the result. > > > > The fact that it already works in 2.6.21-git2 obviously means that _I_ end > > up being less interested, but the -stable tree people would love to hear > > what broke! > > Hi again Linus, > my deep thanks for your excellent explication of git-bisect. > But I unfortunately owe a 100Kbit flatrate, and so downloading some 170 MB > git tree will need the time amount of one entire night (11.5 kb /s if I am > lucky - no more). > Just to take up a different approach: > > The difference between 2.6.21-rc7 and 2.6.21 official does not play any role > at all. > > On the other hand I found out that: > 2.6.21-rc7 made my AMD K7 router work fine > 2.6.21 official hung my AMD K7 router up > 2.6.21-git1 hung my AMD K7 router up > 2.6.21-git2 made my AMD K7 router work. > > In so far the diff between 2.6.21-git1 and 2.6.21-git2 obviously solves the > problem. > Or am I saying something wrong as far as logical terms are concerned? > > > > > > I like small and effective kernels instead of blown up RAM waste. > > > This is no Windoze, man, this is Linux! > > > > Yes. But if you cannot be polite and *RESPECTFUL*, you won't get anywhere > > at all. > > > > This is Linux, not Windows. But that also means that those developers that > > you denigrate aren't getting paid by you, and if you don't show them > > respect, they'll totally ignore you. > > > > Linus > > Now this is the old problem about it all: the hypocricy factor, the utmost > small, if not to say pre-pubertarian character plus some other obviously > counter-productive character traits in those so-called "maintainers" who > behave like kids, but not like grown-ups at all! > Not only you, but also Andrew perfectly and willingly step into the > hypocritic trap and do not even feel that they are trapped! > > For the majority of all cases of the so-called "maintainer personnel" at > linuxtv.org the statement of some missing "politeness" or some missing > "respect" is nothing but an utmost dumb, kiddish, human mediocre and utmost > stupid and utmost hypocritic excuse for bare naked incompatibility, dumbness, > wrong solidarity, kiddishness and technical incompetence. > > They are building up pseudo-authorities to hide their lack of competence, no > matter if their lack of competence funds on technical or human lacks. > And at least the Brazilian Mauro Carvalho Chehab does go even so far to soap > in Andrew Morton's face with this enourmous threat of incompetence, > kiddishness, incompatibility, hypocricy, lies, stigmatisations, stubbornness, > lack of experience, pre-pubertarian behaviour, fascistoid opinion > dictatorship as part of a deep immature anti-democratic and reactionary > personality structure. > > Would you call Mauro Carvalho Chehab a maintainer! > I can certify you that I cannot, even if I try. And I want him to be > substituted as quick as possible as he is the biggest mismatch of gatekeeper > one can ever imagine. > > And it is not only me personally perceiving this that there are people > missing who can go upright and offer sophisticated and good work. > Plus a real sophisticated discussion behaviour, in technical and in human > terms. > Going upright is thus far away from the behaviour NOT to be able to tolerate > any criticism at all. > > Solution: This whole new quite young linuxtv.org team is missing a real grown > up and experienced team leader. Not only that is definitely too much for > Mauro Carvalho Chehab. That is the pain - the consistence of the whole group > is the pain, that's all. Too young, too many lacks of human skills, and > missing an appropriate team leader............. > > So, if I show respect or not, or if I show politeness or not will never > change the whole structural situation at all, as great parts of the whole > team is a disease: > 1. By Chehab being the team leader the whole fish stinks from the head > startup. > Solution: Substitution of Mauro Carvalho Chehab as quick as possible - even > quicker than a storm! > 2. By Krufky being one part of it, doing good work, but executing wrong > solidarities by his bowing behaviour towards pseudo-authorities although he > knows better at least technically this is a question of wrong or right > leadership, nothing else > 3. By Abraham offering us great ranting aims that never are being put into > practice out of certified missing human skills and missing technical > knowledge (the four completely unusable 2.6 kernels were never apologized by > himself) urgent substitution is utmost necessary. > > CLEARER: If anyone of the people knowing the deeper context claims those > "gatekeeper methods" to be a consequence of missing "respect" or missing > "politeness" then those people are either strictly dumb and superficial, or > they owe a gesture that I would call a "Well, I know, but I do not want to > see what's going on"-disease, nothing else. > > Another term to describe the latter would be "bureaucratic lamb head > behaviour". > > See, Linus, if for instance Andrew Morton mails me some statement from that > Chehab going: "Again, do not take the patches from Uwe - he is always > regarding things through his personal prisma, and the rest he simply does not > perceive at all" > > then this is nothing but a gesture full of lies (somehow typical for this > Brazilian fascistoid opinion block head dictator), but it simply shows that > the linuxtv.org teamleader is a horrible mismatch, nothing else! > > His mediocrity and dumbness simply defines through the fact that he is using > stigmatizations very soon in a so-called "discussion" because he misses > a. human skills > b. technical proven arguments and theses > c. enough experience, human or technical one. > > And the biggest threat and shame is the proven fact that Andrew Morton does > obey to such a stupid reactionary idiot and let his face soap in by this > dirty Brazilian hypocrite instead of giving contributions at least a chance > through his mm-tree. > > So there are exactly two solutions: > 1. Andrew Morton should not obey to Chehab anymore and be real open > 2. Chehab and Abraham should be substituted as quick as possible without any > hesitation in no way!!!! > > The one that got to be fired with the most urgent priority is called Mauro > Carvalho Chehab. This is no maintainer, this is no gatekeeper, but this is > nothing but a real personified ape or disease. > > And the argument whether those people are paid for their work or not is > exactly as important as if a sack of rice falls down somewhere in capitalist > China or not..... > OBSOLETE!!! > > Yours sincerely > Uwe >
If eventually somebody thinks this kind of stuff could be helpful, please say so and give us some pointers. Hermann - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
