As yo have found out that patch is no longer useful.
In fact if you apply it to a 2.2.9 or later kernel 2 of the 3
hunks will fail.
I talked to the author of that program, and he said you can
manually apply the patch. It is a very simple patch, so maybe
you should have a look at it. I have other utilities that I use.
Joe
> >
> >> I run it on 2.2.10 quite happly, what paticular kernel are
> you wanting it
> >> for?
> >
> >I currently run several different from 2.2.5 to 2.2.10. I
> didn't simply try it,
> >since most are production machines and it is not "officialy"
> supported on that
> >kernels. if you say it runs stable I'll try it at least on
> one machine.
> >
> >anyway, my question is: why it is possible only using patches
> >but cannot be just included in the standard code?
> >obviously the opinions about a "clean" implementation
> differ...
>
> I've run the SMP patch on kernels up until 2.2.6. With my
> 2.2.10 kernel top
> shows my CPU 1 as CPU 17. I don't know what else its fudging
> so I don't really
> trust its output. So I guess it is "stable", but it does have
> problems with
> its accuracy
> -M@
>
> --
> Matthew Hixson - CIO "Noone has ever tried anything like this
> before."
> FroZenWave Communications "That's why its going to work."
> http://www.frozenwave.com -- Trinity and Neo
>
> -
> Linux SMP list: FIRST see FAQ at
> http://www.irisa.fr/prive/mentre/smp-faq/
> To Unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe linux-smp" to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
-
Linux SMP list: FIRST see FAQ at http://www.irisa.fr/prive/mentre/smp-faq/
To Unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe linux-smp" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
