On Fri, Jun 15 2007, dave young wrote:
> Hi,
> >Better to use the email address in the MAINTAINERS file than
> >the one in the driver source file.
>
> Really? I searched the list, found axboe use the address
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], same as what andrew said. does the MAINTAINERS
> file be updated?
On Thursday 14 June 2007 23:19:24 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Florin Malita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 06/14/2007 05:39 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> Back when GPLv2 was written, the right to run was never considered an
> >> issue. It was taken for granted, because
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:10:07PM -0700, Roland McGrath ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> > Well, it can be uninterruptible sleep, but why?
> > It is not allowed to return to userspace until transaction is completed,
> > so having uninterruptible sleep will result in exactly same lost of
> > signals.
On Friday 15 June 2007 00:14:49 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> case 2'': tivo provides source, end user tries to improve it, realizes
> >> the hardware won't let him use the result of his
On Wednesday 13 June 2007 10:09, Indan Zupancic wrote:
> On Wed, June 13, 2007 10:18, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> Well, as I said before, I've the "stuck key"/repeated output too (as well
> >> as a warping PS/2 mouse), but no blinking led problem, so I believe the
> >> two things are totally
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 is required for the
> machine to boot and run Linux.
> Riddle me this
On Thursday 14 June 2007 23:54:31 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 June 2007 22:21:59 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> Consider egg yolk and egg shells.
> >>
> >> I produce egg yolk. I give it to you under terms that say "if you
>
On Thursday 14 June 2007 23:04:37 Michael Poole wrote:
> Daniel Hazelton writes:
> > On Thursday 14 June 2007 22:13:13 Michael Poole wrote:
> >> The fundamental reason for this is that neither the executable code
> >> nor the digital signature serves the desired function alone. The user
> >>
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 08:20:19PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> So, you see, your statement above, about wanting to be able to use
> other people's improvements, cannot be taken without qualification.
No. Linus and other Linux kernels might *want* to take other people's
improvements, but
Hi,
Historically we did not trust PNP data on i386 because of all the
issues with data put into BIOS by BIOS writers. However there are
bunch of boxes that get really unhappy if we try to poke AUX port
when they don't have mouse attached and BIOS disabled AUX port when
booting. Our keyboard/mouse
On Thursday 14 June 2007 23:39:50 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You're making an artificial distinction based on whether the
> > *SOFTWARE* has a certain license or not.
>
> What matters to me is that, when the GPL says you can't impose
Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:48:36PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
Hi to all,
a simple question the answer to witch I didn't find in CodingStyle.
Look for a code snip:
err = foo(arg_a, arg_b, arg_c,
arg_d);
the second line contains 'd' arg aligned
> Well, it can be uninterruptible sleep, but why?
> It is not allowed to return to userspace until transaction is completed,
> so having uninterruptible sleep will result in exactly same lost of
> signals.
Delay, not loss.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 01:14:49AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> I'm not trying to impose anything. I'm not pushing anything. I'm
> defending the GPLv3 from accusations that it's departing from the GPL
> spirit, and I'm trying to find out in what way Tivoization promotes
> the goals you
On Friday 15 June 2007 00:15, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> How about the patch below instead?
>
And one more time without warnings...
--
Dmitry
Subject: Input: xpad - add support for leds on xbox 360 pad
From: Jan Kratochvil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Input: xpad - add support for leds on xbox 360 pad
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:48:36PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>
> Hi to all,
>
> a simple question the answer to witch I didn't find in CodingStyle.
> Look for a code snip:
>
> err = foo(arg_a, arg_b, arg_c,
> arg_d);
>
> the second line contains 'd' arg aligned with
On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 14:21 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> plain text document attachment (readahead-rename.patch)
> Rename some file_ra_state variables and remove some accessors.
>
> It results in much simpler code.
> Kudos to Rusty!
>
> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Needless
On Thursday 14 June 2007 23:22:48 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Faulty logic. The hardware doesn't *restrict* you from *MODIFYING*
> > any fscking thing.
>
> Ok, lemme try again:
>
> case 2'': tivo provides source, end user tries to
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 09:24:39PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> drivers/w1/slaves/w1_therm.c:w1_therm_read_bin()
>
> while (tm) {
> tm = msleep_interruptible(tm);
> if (signal_pending(current))
> flush_signals(current);
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Michael Poole wrote:
>
> If the signature is one that serves to indicate origin, to detect
> tampering, or the other things you mentioned, the program's binary is
> useful when separated from the signature. My objection arises when a
> functionally equivalent binary --
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
>> Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
>>
>> On Jun 14, 2007, Bill Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> OK. Let's take this to the simple and logical conclusion. A signed
>>> filesystem
Hi Jan,
On Sunday 03 June 2007 14:02, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> + list_for_each_entry(pos_led, _led_list, node) {
> + if (pos_led->id == i)
> + i++;
> + else
> + break;
> + }
I don't like this list business, it
On Jun 15, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> case 2'': tivo provides source, end user tries to improve it, realizes
>> the hardware won't let him use the result of his efforts, and gives up
> So you're blaming Tivo for the fact
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 Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
On Jun 14, 2007, Bill Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK. Let's take this to the simple and logical conclusion. A signed
filesystem image containing both GPL and non-GPL code.
On Jun 15, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> Yes. They'd have to give up the ability to update the software, or
>> pass it on to the user. If they can't do the latter, they could still
>> do the former. How bad would this be
On Thursday June 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
>
> > On Thursday June 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> what is the limit for the number of devices that can be in a single array?
> >>
> >> I'm trying to build a 45x750G array and want to experiment with the
On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 14 June 2007 22:21:59 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> Consider egg yolk and egg shells.
>> I produce egg yolk. I give it to you under terms that say "if you
>> pass this on, you must do so in such a way that doesn't stop
On Jun 15, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Michael Poole wrote:
>>
>> If the DRM signature and program executable are coupled such that they
>> are not useful when separated, the implication to me is that they form
>> one work that is based on the original
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> case 2'': tivo provides source, end user tries to improve it, realizes
> the hardware won't let him use the result of his efforts, and gives up
So you're blaming Tivo for the fact that your end user was a lazy bum and
wanted to take advantage of
On Jun 14, 2007, Bill Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK. Let's take this to the simple and logical conclusion. A signed
> filesystem image containing both GPL and non-GPL code. From your
> point A, this is a derived work.
I claim the signature is derived from the GPLed bits, yes.
malc wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>>
>> * malc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
the alternating balancing might be due to an uneven number of tasks
perhaps? If you have 3 tasks on 2 cores then there's no other
solution to achieve even performance of each task but
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
On Thursday June 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what is the limit for the number of devices that can be in a single array?
I'm trying to build a 45x750G array and want to experiment with the
different configurations. I'm trying to start with raid6, but
On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're making an artificial distinction based on whether the
> *SOFTWARE* has a certain license or not.
What matters to me is that, when the GPL says you can't impose further
restrictions, then you can't, no matter how convoluted your
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> Yes. They'd have to give up the ability to update the software, or
> pass it on to the user. If they can't do the latter, they could still
> do the former. How bad would this be for them, do you know?
In other words, you advocate license for
Linus Torvalds writes:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Michael Poole wrote:
>>
>> If the DRM signature and program executable are coupled such that they
>> are not useful when separated, the implication to me is that they form
>> one work that is based on the original Program. This is beyond the
>> GPL's
On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Faulty logic. The hardware doesn't *restrict* you from *MODIFYING*
> any fscking thing.
Ok, lemme try again:
case 2'': tivo provides source, end user tries to improve it, realizes
the hardware won't let him use the result of his
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Michael Poole wrote:
>
> If the DRM signature and program executable are coupled such that they
> are not useful when separated, the implication to me is that they form
> one work that is based on the original Program. This is beyond the
> GPL's permission for "mere
On Jun 14, 2007, Florin Malita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 06/14/2007 05:39 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> Back when GPLv2 was written, the right to run was never considered an
>> issue. It was taken for granted, because copyright didn't control
>> that in the US (it does in Brazil), and
On Thursday 14 June 2007 05:32:47 Bernd Paysan wrote:
> On Thursday 14 June 2007 03:24, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Harald is in Germany, and he therefore takes legal action against people
> > distributing products violating his copyright on the Linux kernel
> > in Germany at German courts based on
On Jun 14, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> It's disappointing that I took so much of everyone's time without
>> achieving any of my goals.
> What do you expect, when you tried to entertain a legal picture of the
> GPLv2 that
On Thursday June 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> what is the limit for the number of devices that can be in a single array?
>
> I'm trying to build a 45x750G array and want to experiment with the
> different configurations. I'm trying to start with raid6, but mdadm is
> complaining about an
Daniel Hazelton writes:
> On Thursday 14 June 2007 22:13:13 Michael Poole wrote:
>
>> The fundamental reason for this is that neither the executable code
>> nor the digital signature serves the desired function alone. The user
>> received a copy of the executable for a particular purpose: to run
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 06:32:32PM +0900, Yasunori Goto wrote:
> Thanks. I tested compile with cpu/memory hotplug off/on.
> It was OK.
>
> Acked-by: Yasunori Goto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
It would be nice to have this for 2.6.22..
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
what is the limit for the number of devices that can be in a single array?
I'm trying to build a 45x750G array and want to experiment with the
different configurations. I'm trying to start with raid6, but mdadm is
complaining about an invalid number of drives
David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from
> Looks whitespace-damaged to me.
> Pavel
Oops, I sent patches with "Content-type: format=flowed" header.
I think your mail client converted tabs into spaces.
The orignal patches themselves are not whitespace-damaged.
On Thursday 14 June 2007 22:21:59 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the GPLv2 license says no such thing, and you seem to be mighty confused
> > about how software licenses work.
> >
> > the GPL applies to software. It is a software license.
> >
>
On Jun 14, 2007, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 14 June 2007 19:20:19 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> I understand this very well. You'd have to get the kernel upgraded to
>> GPLv3 in order to accept the contribution.
> Why do you keep saying "upgraded" to GPLv3?
Just because
On Thursday 14 June 2007 22:13:13 Michael Poole wrote:
> Daniel Hazelton writes:
> > What rights did they give to "downstream" recipients of the "object code"
> > version? *EXACTLY* those they received from the GPLv2.
>
> Doing the e-mail equivalent of yelling about this will not change the
On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 14 June 2007 17:27:27 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > And the companies that produce devices that come with Linux and/or
>> > other GPL'd software installed
Hello.
James Morris wrote:
> Note that while SELinux does also have a similar capability with the
> audit2allow tool, it should be considered an expert tool, the output of
> which needs to be understood before use (as noted in its man page).
Yes, adding "allow" statement without understanding
Alexandre Oliva ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> > Wait, a signed filesystem image that happens to contain GPL code
> > is now a derived work? Under what sort of interpretation does *that*
> > occur?
>
> Is the signature not derived from the bits in the GPLed component, as
> much as it is derived
:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/xscaleiop/md-accel-2.6.22-rc4-20070614.patch
[ It's actually based on current git but should apply cleanly to 2.6.22-rc4. ]
If you are so inclined the most up-to-date version is available via git.
git pull git://lost.foo-projects.org/~dwillia2/git/iop md-accel-linus
It should p
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > The metadata needs to refer to 1/16th of the earlier pages that need to be
> > tracked. metadata is shrunk significantly.
>
> Only if the filesystems are altered to use larger blocksizes and if the
> operator then chooses to use that feature. Then
On Thursday 14 June 2007 21:43:07 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 June 2007 14:35:29 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >
> >
> >> > So let's look at that "section 6" that you talk about, and quote the
> >> > relevant parts, will we:
On Jun 14, 2007, Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Jun 14, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Hmm... So, if someone takes one of the many GPLv2+
On Jun 14, 2007, Bill Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
>> And since the specific implementation involves creating a derived work
>> of the GPLed kernel (the signature, or the signed image, or what have
>> you)
> Wait, a signed filesystem image
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:04:27 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > Of course there is. The seeks are reduced since there are an factor
> > > of 16 less metadata blocks. fsck does not read files. It just reads
> > > metadata structures. And the larger contiguous areas
On Jun 14, 2007, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the GPLv2 license says no such thing, and you seem to be mighty confused
> about how software licenses work.
> 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
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> It's disappointing that I took so much of everyone's time without
> achieving any of my goals.
What do you expect, when you tried to entertain a legal picture of the
GPLv2 that even the FSF counsel doesn't believe in?
I will state one more
Daniel Hazelton writes:
> What rights did they give to "downstream" recipients of the "object code"
> version? *EXACTLY* those they received from the GPLv2.
Doing the e-mail equivalent of yelling about this will not change the
fact that people who think Tivo did something wrong -- legally
On Jun 14, 2007, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 14 June 2007 13:46:40 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> Well, then, ok: do all that loader and hardware signature-checking
>> dancing, sign the image, store it in the machine, and throw the
>> signing key away. This should be good
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> There will be files which should use 64k but which instead end up using 4k.
>
> There will be files which should use 4k but which instead end up using 64k.
>
> Because determining which size to use requires either operator intervention
> or kernel
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, 14 June 2007 16:21, David Brownell wrote:
> > On Wednesday 13 June 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > The suspend routines should be called for every device during a system
> >
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 06:53:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Please pull this single patch from:
> > > >
> > > > git://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/kbuild-fix.git
> > > >
> > And another re-request.
>
> I get
On Thursday 14 June 2007 15:49:13 Daniel Hazelton wrote:
> > I'm not saying it legally clear the other way round, my statement was
> > an answer to Daniel's emails claiming it was clear what such companies
> > do was legal.
>
> I'm sorry if I gave anyone that impression. My point was that it would
On Thursday 14 June 2007 18:45:07 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, "Chris Friesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> *AND* the GPL has never been about making the source available to
> >>> everyone
On Thursday 14 June 2007 18:35:01 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I want to be able to use other peoples improvements. If they release
> > improved versions of the software I started, I want to be able to merge
> > those improvements if I
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > >
> > > Please pull this single patch from:
> > > git://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/kbuild-fix.git
> > >
> And another re-request.
I get irritated when people send me multiple requests with bogus URL's.
At least get the URL
On Jun 14, 2007, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's an addiction. I'm not proud.
I guess this makes it two of us :-(
> They were basically forced to add lockdown by the content vendors.
They can do that. They will still be able to do that with v3.
All they have to do is to
On 06/14/2007 05:39 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Jun 14, 2007, Florin Malita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No, it's not: replacing does not create derivative
work. Modification does.
Thanks. Good point. This convinces me that this doesn't work as a
legal argument under copyright.
I
On Thursday 14 June 2007 19:18:12 Carlo Wood wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 01:09:46PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I'm the original author, and I selected the GPLv2 for Linux.
>
> [...]
>
> > I'm not going to bother discussing this any more. You don't seem to
> > respect my right to choose
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 08:15:07AM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> Resend of the below pull request.
>
> Sam
>
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 09:55:52PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > Hi Linus.
> >
> > Please apply following 2 liners fix.
> > It will fix a lot of false section mismatch warnings
On Thursday 14 June 2007 18:24:55 David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 21:29 -0400, Daniel Hazelton wrote:
> > Agreed. However, AFAICT, TiVO meets the provisions of the GPLv2 - they
> > make the source of the GPL'd part of their system available. (And I'm not
> > going to get into
On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 14 June 2007 14:35:29 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
>> > So let's look at that "section 6" that you talk about, and quote the
>> > relevant parts, will we:
>> >
>> >You may not impose any further restrictions on the
dave young wrote:
Hi,
Better to use the email address in the MAINTAINERS file than
the one in the driver source file.
Really? I searched the list, found axboe use the address
[EMAIL PROTECTED], same as what andrew said. does the MAINTAINERS
file be updated?
Could be, but that's up to Jens.
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:45:43 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > I do not think that the 100% users will do kernel compiles all day like
> > > we do. We likely would prefer 4k page size for our small text files.
> >
> >
On Thursday 14 June 2007 17:39:32 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
> And since the specific implementation involves creating a derived work
> of the GPLed kernel (the signature, or the signed image, or what have
> you) and refraining from providing the corresponding sources to that
> derived work (the
Hi Adrian,
Thanks for doing these, but can we hold them off for now?
Thanks,
Nick
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 12:15:45AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> cont_expand_zero() can become static.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ---
> --- linux-2.6.22-rc4-mm2/fs/buffer.c.old
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 12:16:28AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> This patch contains the following cleanups:
> - remove the following no longer used functions:
> - bitmap.c: reiserfs_claim_blocks_to_be_allocated()
> - bitmap.c: reiserfs_release_claimed_blocks()
> - bitmap.c:
On Jun 14, 2007, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now the FSF is coming along and being Darth Vader: "I am altering
> the bargain. Pray I don't alter it any further."
1) it can't possibly do that. the Linux license is something that
only the Linux developers can decide.
2) I don't
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 09:20:35PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
> Why do you keep saying "upgraded" to GPLv3? How is it an improvement to move
> from a small, simple, elegant, and tested implementation to something that's
> more complicated, less elegant, less coherent, totally untested, and full
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 04:36:09PM +0900, Kentaro Takeda wrote:
We limit the maximum length of any string data (such as domainname and
pathnames)
to TOMOYO_MAX_PATHNAME_LEN (which is 4000) bytes to fit within a single
page.
Userland programs can obtain the amount of
Uh, can we get some docs? Like how this is better than selinux, what
it does, how is it configured...?
Pavel
That message and its children were meant to be put
under the bellow message. Sorry for the confusion.
* Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the GPLv2 license says no such thing, and you seem to be mighty
> > confused about how software licenses work.
>
> There is no such thing as a software licence. It is a copyright
> licence.
a "software license" is a common shortcut for "copyright
On 6/14/07, Paul Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On 6/14/07, Paul Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Mike Snitzer wrote:
>>
>> > Here are the steps to reproduce reliably on SLES10 SP1:
>> > 1) establish a raid1 mirror (md0) using one local member (sdc1) and
>> > one
On Jun 14, 2007, Bongani Hlope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 14 June 2007 21:32:08 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 14, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
>> > They let you have the code and make changes to it,
>>
>> Not to the software installed in the device.
> So
On Thursday 14 June 2007 19:20:19 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > But not within the confines of the Linux kernel. Within the Linux kernel,
> > the GPLv2 rules - and "GPLv2+" becomes just "GPLv2", since the GPLv3 is
> > not compatible with v2.
>
> I understand this very well. You'd have to get the
Mike Snitzer wrote:
On 6/14/07, Paul Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mike Snitzer wrote:
> Here are the steps to reproduce reliably on SLES10 SP1:
> 1) establish a raid1 mirror (md0) using one local member (sdc1) and
> one remote member (nbd0)
> 2) power off the remote machine, whereby
On 6/14/07, Paul Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mike Snitzer wrote:
> Here are the steps to reproduce reliably on SLES10 SP1:
> 1) establish a raid1 mirror (md0) using one local member (sdc1) and
> one remote member (nbd0)
> 2) power off the remote machine, whereby severing nbd0's
Mike Snitzer wrote:
Here are the steps to reproduce reliably on SLES10 SP1:
1) establish a raid1 mirror (md0) using one local member (sdc1) and
one remote member (nbd0)
2) power off the remote machine, whereby severing nbd0's connection
3) perform IO to the filesystem that is on the md0 device
I have an LSI Logic card attached to a RAID. The RAID occasionally
reports SCSI bus resets,although that might be unrelated because I
have other units of this RAID with the same complaint, but then this
just recently was reported by the card:
Jun 14 19:19:51 [kernel] [86189.359115] mptbase:
On 6/14/07, Paul Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Second, AFAIK nbd hasn't working in a while. I haven't tried it in ages,
> but was told it wouldn't work with smp and I kind of lost interest. If
> Neil thinks it should work in 2.6.21 or later I'll test it, since I
Mike Snitzer wrote:
Just a quick update; it is really starting to look like there is
definitely an issue with the nbd kernel driver. I booted the SLES10
2.6.16.46-0.12-smp kernel with maxcpus=1 to test the theory that the
nbd SMP fix that went into 2.6.16 was in some way causing this MD/NBD
On Thursday 14 June 2007 17:27:27 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > And the companies that produce devices that come with Linux and/or
> > other GPL'd software installed and place limits such that only
> > people that have purchased that
On Thursday 14 June 2007 17:19:51 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2007, Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > With GPLv2 and prior there was a simple guarantee that every
> > "Licensee" had exactly the same rights. With GPLv3 you are forcing
> > your ethics and morals on people - and
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, 14 Jun 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I do not think that the 100% users will do kernel compiles all day like
> > we do. We likely would prefer 4k page size for our small text files.
>
> There are many, many applications which use small files.
There is no problem with them using 4k
On Thursday 14 June 2007 18:24:42 David Schwartz wrote:
> I don't know who you are talking to or what you are talking about. I
> haven't seen anybody doing what you claim in this thread or anywhere else
> and I certainly am not.
I'm asking what is the _point_ of the discussion?
Linux, the
1 - 100 of 1278 matches
Mail list logo
