On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 10:28:30AM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 05:24:20PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> >
> >>I'll offer this suggestion, knowing it may piss you off, given the
> >>difficulty of preserving whitespace on *many* mailers without
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 05:24:20PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I'll offer this suggestion, knowing it may piss you off, given the
difficulty of preserving whitespace on *many* mailers without using
attachments, and given that attachments can be saved easily without
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 05:24:20PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> I'll offer this suggestion, knowing it may piss you off, given the
> difficulty of preserving whitespace on *many* mailers without using
> attachments, and given that attachments can be saved easily without
> prying them out of
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 05:24:20PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I'll offer this suggestion, knowing it may piss you off, given the
difficulty of preserving whitespace on *many* mailers without using
attachments, and given that attachments can be saved easily without
prying them out of the
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 05:24:20PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I'll offer this suggestion, knowing it may piss you off, given the
difficulty of preserving whitespace on *many* mailers without using
attachments, and given that attachments can be saved easily without
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 10:28:30AM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 05:24:20PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I'll offer this suggestion, knowing it may piss you off, given the
difficulty of preserving whitespace on *many* mailers without using
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:24:20 -0400 Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
> > This seems reasonable, so I tried to use it. Here are the results
> > and comments and meta-comments.
> >
> >
> > 1. Please forcibly wrap text lines in mail body at around column 70-72.
> >
> > 2. Put
Randy Dunlap wrote:
This seems reasonable, so I tried to use it. Here are the results
and comments and meta-comments.
1. Please forcibly wrap text lines in mail body at around column 70-72.
2. Put patches inline in the mail body, not as attachments.
I'll offer this suggestion, knowing it
Randy Dunlap wrote:
This seems reasonable, so I tried to use it. Here are the results
and comments and meta-comments.
1. Please forcibly wrap text lines in mail body at around column 70-72.
2. Put patches inline in the mail body, not as attachments.
I'll offer this suggestion, knowing it
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:24:20 -0400 Bill Davidsen wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
This seems reasonable, so I tried to use it. Here are the results
and comments and meta-comments.
1. Please forcibly wrap text lines in mail body at around column 70-72.
2. Put patches inline in the
Heh, well of course I vigoursly checked System.map. On my x86 and amd64
systems it removes them all. What a stupid question :-p
Nope. I expect(ed) you to do that, i.e., make sure that the patch
does that the description says that it does.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
Jonathan Campbell wrote:
Sorry about that. That's why I always send as attachments.
Do you have similar problems when using Mozilla Thunderbird?
tbird works when following the instructions at
http://mbligh.org/linuxdocs/Email/Clients/Thunderbird
or (simpler) use an External Editor plugin.
Sorry about that. That's the reason I send them as attachments.
Any suggestions for someone like myself using Mozilla Thunderbird?
Damaged as the patch is, I was able to apply it by using
'patch -l' (ignore whitespace) + some fuzz. Not something that
Linus or Andrew would or should do.
I built
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:42:16 -0700 Jonathan Campbell wrote:
> Here is the DMI patch again, written against linux-2.6.23-rc8,
> with some of the #ifdef CONFIG_DMI's removed and moved
> to include/linux/dmi.h. Putting them there in the way I've done
> ensures that you don't have to put #ifdef
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:42:16 -0700 Jonathan Campbell wrote:
> Here is the DMI patch again, written against linux-2.6.23-rc8,
> with some of the #ifdef CONFIG_DMI's removed and moved
> to include/linux/dmi.h. Putting them there in the way I've done
> ensures that you don't have to put #ifdef
Here is the DMI patch again, written against linux-2.6.23-rc8,
with some of the #ifdef CONFIG_DMI's removed and moved
to include/linux/dmi.h. Putting them there in the way I've done
ensures that you don't have to put #ifdef CONFIG_DMI
around each dmi_check_machine() and that you don't
have to
Here is the DMI patch again, written against linux-2.6.23-rc8,
with some of the #ifdef CONFIG_DMI's removed and moved
to include/linux/dmi.h. Putting them there in the way I've done
ensures that you don't have to put #ifdef CONFIG_DMI
around each dmi_check_machine() and that you don't
have to
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:42:16 -0700 Jonathan Campbell wrote:
Here is the DMI patch again, written against linux-2.6.23-rc8,
with some of the #ifdef CONFIG_DMI's removed and moved
to include/linux/dmi.h. Putting them there in the way I've done
ensures that you don't have to put #ifdef
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:42:16 -0700 Jonathan Campbell wrote:
Here is the DMI patch again, written against linux-2.6.23-rc8,
with some of the #ifdef CONFIG_DMI's removed and moved
to include/linux/dmi.h. Putting them there in the way I've done
ensures that you don't have to put #ifdef
Sorry about that. That's the reason I send them as attachments.
Any suggestions for someone like myself using Mozilla Thunderbird?
Damaged as the patch is, I was able to apply it by using
'patch -l' (ignore whitespace) + some fuzz. Not something that
Linus or Andrew would or should do.
I built
Jonathan Campbell wrote:
Sorry about that. That's why I always send as attachments.
Do you have similar problems when using Mozilla Thunderbird?
tbird works when following the instructions at
http://mbligh.org/linuxdocs/Email/Clients/Thunderbird
or (simpler) use an External Editor plugin.
Heh, well of course I vigoursly checked System.map. On my x86 and amd64
systems it removes them all. What a stupid question :-p
Nope. I expect(ed) you to do that, i.e., make sure that the patch
does that the description says that it does.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Sep 24 2007 15:09, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > +#if defined(__i386__) && defined(CONFIG_DMI)
> > dmi_check_system(acpi_dmi_table);
> > #endif
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
> > dmi_scan_machine();
> > +#endif
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
> > /* Check and install the TSC clocksource */
>
On Sep 24 2007 15:09, Dave Jones wrote:
+#if defined(__i386__) defined(CONFIG_DMI)
dmi_check_system(acpi_dmi_table);
#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
dmi_scan_machine();
+#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
/* Check and install the TSC clocksource */
On 267, 09 24, 2007 at 03:09:17PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:51:17AM -0700, Jonathan Campbell wrote:
>
>
> > +#if defined(__i386__) && defined(CONFIG_DMI)
> >dmi_check_system(acpi_dmi_table);
> > #endif
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
> >dmi_scan_machine();
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:51:17AM -0700, Jonathan Campbell wrote:
> +#if defined(__i386__) && defined(CONFIG_DMI)
> dmi_check_system(acpi_dmi_table);
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
> dmi_scan_machine();
> +#endif
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
> /* Check and install the
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 01:51:17 -0700 Jonathan Campbell wrote:
> Sorry for the long delay, been very busy since I last posted the 386
> kernel patches back in July.
> Now that I have more free time I remade the patches in a cleaner manner,
> broken down into
> smaller patches, with fewer #ifdefs
Sorry for the long delay, been very busy since I last posted the 386
kernel patches back in July.
Now that I have more free time I remade the patches in a cleaner manner,
broken down into
smaller patches, with fewer #ifdefs all over the place. most #ifdefs are
in the include/asm-i386 headers
Sorry for the long delay, been very busy since I last posted the 386
kernel patches back in July.
Now that I have more free time I remade the patches in a cleaner manner,
broken down into
smaller patches, with fewer #ifdefs all over the place. most #ifdefs are
in the include/asm-i386 headers
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 01:51:17 -0700 Jonathan Campbell wrote:
Sorry for the long delay, been very busy since I last posted the 386
kernel patches back in July.
Now that I have more free time I remade the patches in a cleaner manner,
broken down into
smaller patches, with fewer #ifdefs all
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:51:17AM -0700, Jonathan Campbell wrote:
+#if defined(__i386__) defined(CONFIG_DMI)
dmi_check_system(acpi_dmi_table);
#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
dmi_scan_machine();
+#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
/* Check and install the TSC
On 267, 09 24, 2007 at 03:09:17PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:51:17AM -0700, Jonathan Campbell wrote:
+#if defined(__i386__) defined(CONFIG_DMI)
dmi_check_system(acpi_dmi_table);
#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_DMI
dmi_scan_machine();
+#endif
32 matches
Mail list logo
