* Bill Davidsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >>nfsd--svcrpc-add-a-per-flavor-set_client-method.patch
> >
> >is this critical?
>
> Wasn't part of the Linus proposal that it had to fix an oops or
> non-functional feature?
We're working on the criteria, should have some
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Unless it's crashing for people, stack usage is IMO a wanted-fix not
needed-fix.
nfsd--svcrpc-add-a-per-flavor-set_client-method.patch
is this critical?
Wasn't part of the Linus proposal that it had to fix an oops or
non-functional feature?
--
-bill davidsen ([EMAIL
On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 17:18 +, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sad, 2005-03-05 at 22:06, Lee Revell wrote:
> > Driver updates are a hard problem. Nothing annoys users more than
> > unsupported hardware. But if you aggressively add support for new
> > devices you can break things that have worked for
On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 17:18 +, Alan Cox wrote:
On Sad, 2005-03-05 at 22:06, Lee Revell wrote:
Driver updates are a hard problem. Nothing annoys users more than
unsupported hardware. But if you aggressively add support for new
devices you can break things that have worked for ages.
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Unless it's crashing for people, stack usage is IMO a wanted-fix not
needed-fix.
nfsd--svcrpc-add-a-per-flavor-set_client-method.patch
is this critical?
Wasn't part of the Linus proposal that it had to fix an oops or
non-functional feature?
--
-bill davidsen ([EMAIL
* Bill Davidsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Jeff Garzik wrote:
nfsd--svcrpc-add-a-per-flavor-set_client-method.patch
is this critical?
Wasn't part of the Linus proposal that it had to fix an oops or
non-functional feature?
We're working on the criteria, should have some updates posted
On Sad, 2005-03-05 at 22:06, Lee Revell wrote:
> Driver updates are a hard problem. Nothing annoys users more than
> unsupported hardware. But if you aggressively add support for new
> devices you can break things that have worked for ages.
You can however plan for them in advance. Guess why
On Sad, 2005-03-05 at 22:06, Lee Revell wrote:
Driver updates are a hard problem. Nothing annoys users more than
unsupported hardware. But if you aggressively add support for new
devices you can break things that have worked for ages.
You can however plan for them in advance. Guess why the
Shawn Starr wrote:
Sure, I can do this. Wrt to trivial patches, will these patches that go into
rusty's patch bot go into Linus's tree or into the -mm tree?
The reason I ask that is because a trivial patch may fix an oops if there's an
off-by-one problem and typically I'd submit that to the
Sure, I can do this. Wrt to trivial patches, will these patches that go into
rusty's patch bot go into Linus's tree or into the -mm tree?
The reason I ask that is because a trivial patch may fix an oops if there's an
off-by-one problem and typically I'd submit that to the trivial patch bot.
Sure, I can do this. Wrt to trivial patches, will these patches that go into
rusty's patch bot go into Linus's tree or into the -mm tree?
The reason I ask that is because a trivial patch may fix an oops if there's an
off-by-one problem and typically I'd submit that to the trivial patch bot.
Shawn Starr wrote:
Sure, I can do this. Wrt to trivial patches, will these patches that go into
rusty's patch bot go into Linus's tree or into the -mm tree?
The reason I ask that is because a trivial patch may fix an oops if there's an
off-by-one problem and typically I'd submit that to the
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 01:16:10AM -0500, Shawn Starr wrote:
> Sounds great, I can be a QA resource for what machines I have.
>
> How do people get involved in QAing these releases?
Get the last release and test it out. If you have problems, and have
simple/obvious patches, send them on.
; >
> >
> >Is this really a big deal?
>
> If you are pushing linux-release to Linus/Andrew rapidly, quick fixes
> will land in linux-2.6 rapidly, and more invasive stuff will land only
> in linux-2.6 when the invasive stuff is ready to go. It even takes the
> pressure of
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 02:53:43AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel
On Saturday 05 March 2005 17:06, Lee Revell wrote:
>On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 16:49 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> What he said! Perfectly good patches, which fix real problems
>> would appear to be sitting in testing/broken_out till bit rot or
>> ???.
>>
>> If you want a testers testimony, I'm
On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 16:49 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> What he said! Perfectly good patches, which fix real problems would
> appear to be sitting in testing/broken_out till bit rot or ???.
>
> If you want a testers testimony, I'm running the bk-ieee1394.patch,
> and all I can say at this
On Saturday 05 March 2005 16:17, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Russell King wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:40:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> > I love BK, but what BK does well is merging and maintaining
>> > trees full of good stuff. What BK sucks at is experimental stuff
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Russell King wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:40:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I love BK, but what BK does well is merging and maintaining trees full of
> > good stuff. What BK sucks at is experimental stuff where you don't know
> > whether something should be
ertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Summary of changes from v2.6.11 to v2.6.11.1
Dmitry Torokhov:
o Fix keyboards for Dell machines
Greg Kroah-Hartman:
o Linux 2.6.11.1
Olof Johansson:
o Fix for trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec
Rene
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Yup, BK could definitely handle that...
However, it's also true that the thing BK is _worst_ at is cherry-picking
things, and having a collection of stuff where somebody may end up vetoing
one patch and saying "remove that one".
So
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Yup, BK could definitely handle that...
However, it's also true that the thing BK is _worst_ at is cherry-picking
things, and having a collection of stuff where somebody may end up vetoing
one patch and saying "remove that one".
In
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:40:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I love BK, but what BK does well is merging and maintaining trees full of
> good stuff. What BK sucks at is experimental stuff where you don't know
> whether something should be eventually used or not.
Wait a minute - why would
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> Yup, BK could definitely handle that...
However, it's also true that the thing BK is _worst_ at is cherry-picking
things, and having a collection of stuff where somebody may end up vetoing
one patch and saying "remove that one".
So it's entirely
Russell King wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:05:18PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
That tree has the not-for-linus raid6 fix and the not-for-linus i8042 fix.
Then when the authors of those patches go to submit the fix to Linus,
they can
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:05:18PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > That tree has the not-for-linus raid6 fix and the not-for-linus i8042 fix.
>
> Then when the authors of those patches go to submit the fix to Linus,
> they can revert
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:05:18PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
That tree has the not-for-linus raid6 fix and the not-for-linus i8042 fix.
Then when the authors of those patches go to submit the fix to Linus,
they can revert them, or
Russell King wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:05:18PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
That tree has the not-for-linus raid6 fix and the not-for-linus i8042 fix.
Then when the authors of those patches go to submit the fix to Linus,
they can
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Yup, BK could definitely handle that...
However, it's also true that the thing BK is _worst_ at is cherry-picking
things, and having a collection of stuff where somebody may end up vetoing
one patch and saying remove that one.
So it's entirely
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:40:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I love BK, but what BK does well is merging and maintaining trees full of
good stuff. What BK sucks at is experimental stuff where you don't know
whether something should be eventually used or not.
Wait a minute - why would
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Yup, BK could definitely handle that...
However, it's also true that the thing BK is _worst_ at is cherry-picking
things, and having a collection of stuff where somebody may end up vetoing
one patch and saying remove that one.
In
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Yup, BK could definitely handle that...
However, it's also true that the thing BK is _worst_ at is cherry-picking
things, and having a collection of stuff where somebody may end up vetoing
one patch and saying remove that one.
So
v2.6.11 to v2.6.11.1
Dmitry Torokhov:
o Fix keyboards for Dell machines
Greg Kroah-Hartman:
o Linux 2.6.11.1
Olof Johansson:
o Fix for trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec
Rene Rebe:
o trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Russell King wrote:
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:40:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I love BK, but what BK does well is merging and maintaining trees full of
good stuff. What BK sucks at is experimental stuff where you don't know
whether something should be
On Saturday 05 March 2005 16:17, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Russell King wrote:
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:40:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I love BK, but what BK does well is merging and maintaining
trees full of good stuff. What BK sucks at is experimental stuff
where
On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 16:49 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
What he said! Perfectly good patches, which fix real problems would
appear to be sitting in testing/broken_out till bit rot or ???.
If you want a testers testimony, I'm running the bk-ieee1394.patch,
and all I can say at this point is
On Saturday 05 March 2005 17:06, Lee Revell wrote:
On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 16:49 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
What he said! Perfectly good patches, which fix real problems
would appear to be sitting in testing/broken_out till bit rot or
???.
If you want a testers testimony, I'm running the
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 02:53:43AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel history which
linux-release to Linus/Andrew rapidly, quick fixes
will land in linux-2.6 rapidly, and more invasive stuff will land only
in linux-2.6 when the invasive stuff is ready to go. It even takes the
pressure off pushing invasive stuff ASAP.
Have you pushed linux-2.6.11.1 upstream yet
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 01:16:10AM -0500, Shawn Starr wrote:
Sounds great, I can be a QA resource for what machines I have.
How do people get involved in QAing these releases?
Get the last release and test it out. If you have problems, and have
simple/obvious patches, send them on.
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel history which simply
> > > should not have been there.
>
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:51:13PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> > > is this critical?
> >
> > Doubt it, unless the succeeding patches have a dependency on it. But the
> > other patches have not been tested
Sounds great, I can be a QA resource for what machines I have.
How do people get involved in QAing these releases?
What other help?
Shawn.
> List: linux-kernel
> Subject: Linux 2.6.11.1
> From: Greg KH
> Date: 2005-03-04 17:53:02
> Message-ID: <2005
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:48:20PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 09:53 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > ---
> >
> > I've released the 2.6.11.1 patch:
> > kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/v2.6.11/patch-2.6.11.1.gz
> >
> > With a detailed changelog at:
>
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:15:37PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I
> > > was
> > > planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that was going to be
> > > errata-only.
> >
> >
Andrew Morton wrote:
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintain a 2.6.x.y set of
releases that happen after 2.6.x is released.
Just to test things out a bit...
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
planning on
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:15:37PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2.
> > > > I was
> > > > planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:54:02PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:15:37PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:34:22PM -0600, Ian Pilcher wrote:
> From a purely process point of view, my concern would be making sure
> that everything that goes into 2.6.X.Y (e.g. 2.6.11.1) makes it into
> 2.6.X+1 (e.g. 2.6.12).
It will be so.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:51:13PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > cramfs-small-stat2-fix.patch
> > > setup_per_zone_lowmem_reserve-oops-fix.patch
> > > dv1394-ioctl-retval-fix.patch
> > > ppc32-compilation-fixes-for-ebony-luan-and-ocotea.patch
> > >
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > cramfs-small-stat2-fix.patch
> > setup_per_zone_lowmem_reserve-oops-fix.patch
> > dv1394-ioctl-retval-fix.patch
> > ppc32-compilation-fixes-for-ebony-luan-and-ocotea.patch
> > nfsd--sgi-921857-find-broken-with-nohide-on-nfsv3.patch
> >
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > >
> > > Ok, care to forward them on?
> >
> > Sure. How do they get to Linus?
>
> I'll just pull from the sucker-tree.
>
That tree has the not-for-linus raid6 fix and the not-for-linus i8042
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > Ok, care to forward them on?
>
> Sure. How do they get to Linus?
I'll just pull from the sucker-tree.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:44:31PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> wrt the nfsd patches, Neil said:
>
> The problem they fix is that currently:
> Client A holds a lock
> Client B tries to get the lock and blocks
> Client A drops the lock
> **Client B doesn't get the lock
rapidly, and more invasive stuff will land only
in linux-2.6 when the invasive stuff is ready to go. It even takes the
pressure off pushing invasive stuff ASAP.
Have you pushed linux-2.6.11.1 upstream yet? :)
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
Andrew Morton wrote:
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
> planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that was going to be
> errata-only.
Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
linux-release team
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel history which simply
> > should not have been there.
>
> Is this really a big deal?
Once? No. If it ends up being "par for the course",
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel history which simply
> should not have been there.
Is this really a big deal?
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, care to forward them on?
> > > >
> > > > Sure. How do
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:44:31PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2.
...
> nfsd--exportfs-reduce-stack-usage.patch
...
Different people want different things with our 2.6.x.y.
I would hope that criteria include (i) patch is
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Ok, care to forward them on?
> > >
> > > Sure. How do they get to Linus?
> >
> > I'll just pull from the
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
> > planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that was going to be
> > errata-only.
>
> Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
> Hm, odds are the
fr den 04.03.2005 Klokka 12:44 (-0800) skreiv Andrew Morton:
> nfsd--sgi-921857-find-broken-with-nohide-on-nfsv3.patch
> nfsd--exportfs-reduce-stack-usage.patch
> nfsd--svcrpc-add-a-per-flavor-set_client-method.patch
> nfsd--svcrpc-rename-pg_authenticate.patch
>
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:44:31PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintain a 2.6.x.y set of
> > releases that happen after 2.6.x is released.
>
> Just to test things out a bit...
>
> Here's the list of things
On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 12:53 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> See the comments above the part you snipped off, that stated the
> infrastructure is still being worked on :)
>
Damn, I somehow missed that paragraph. Well, I've read the whole darn
thread and still am getting work done. I guess I've
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintain a 2.6.x.y set of
> releases that happen after 2.6.x is released.
Just to test things out a bit...
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
planning on sending them in
From a purely process point of view, my concern would be making sure
that everything that goes into 2.6.X.Y (e.g. 2.6.11.1) makes it into
2.6.X+1 (e.g. 2.6.12).
--
Ian Pilcher[EMAIL
On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 09:53 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> ---
>
> I've released the 2.6.11.1 patch:
> kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/v2.6.11/patch-2.6.11.1.gz
>
> With a detailed changelog at:
> kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/v2.6.11/ChangeLog-2.6.11.1
>
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 08:28:58PM +0100, Paolo wrote:
> Out of curiosity, are you going to include the -as branch ?
The whole thing? No, see previous comments about the contents of the
-as and -ac "branches" in the big lkml thread.
But if people will forward on bits and pieces of the -as and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greg KH wrote:
| On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 08:28:58PM +0100, Paolo wrote:
|
|>Out of curiosity, are you going to include the -as branch ?
|
|
| The whole thing? No, see previous comments about the contents of the
| -as and -ac "branches" in the big lkml
Paolo wrote:
Out of curiosity, are you going to include the -as branch ?
The -as stuff should be built on top of 2.6.11.X.
2.6.11.X should not be "every fix under the sun, until 2.6.12 is released."
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
| For those of you who haven't waded through the huge "RFD: Kernel release
| numbering" thread on lkml to realize that we are now going to start
| putting out 2.6.x.y releases, here's the summary:
|
| A few of us $suckers will be trying to
=
Dmitry Torokhov:
o Fix keyboards for Dell machines
Greg Kroah-Hartman:
o Linux 2.6.11.1
Olof Johansson:
o Fix for trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec
Rene Rebe:
o trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec
-
To unsubscribe from this li
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 09:53:02AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> I'll also be replying to this message with a copy of the patch itself,
> as it is small enough to do so.
Here it is
diff -Nru a/Makefile b/Makefile
--- a/Makefile 2005-03-04 09:27:15 -08:00
+++ b/Makefile 2005-03-04 09:27:15
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 09:53:02AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
I'll also be replying to this message with a copy of the patch itself,
as it is small enough to do so.
Here it is
diff -Nru a/Makefile b/Makefile
--- a/Makefile 2005-03-04 09:27:15 -08:00
+++ b/Makefile 2005-03-04 09:27:15 -08:00
Torokhov:
o Fix keyboards for Dell machines
Greg Kroah-Hartman:
o Linux 2.6.11.1
Olof Johansson:
o Fix for trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec
Rene Rebe:
o trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
| For those of you who haven't waded through the huge RFD: Kernel release
| numbering thread on lkml to realize that we are now going to start
| putting out 2.6.x.y releases, here's the summary:
|
| A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintain
Paolo wrote:
Out of curiosity, are you going to include the -as branch ?
The -as stuff should be built on top of 2.6.11.X.
2.6.11.X should not be every fix under the sun, until 2.6.12 is released.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 08:28:58PM +0100, Paolo wrote:
Out of curiosity, are you going to include the -as branch ?
The whole thing? No, see previous comments about the contents of the
-as and -ac branches in the big lkml thread.
But if people will forward on bits and pieces of the -as and -ac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greg KH wrote:
| On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 08:28:58PM +0100, Paolo wrote:
|
|Out of curiosity, are you going to include the -as branch ?
|
|
| The whole thing? No, see previous comments about the contents of the
| -as and -ac branches in the big lkml
On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 09:53 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
---
I've released the 2.6.11.1 patch:
kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/v2.6.11/patch-2.6.11.1.gz
With a detailed changelog at:
kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/v2.6.11/ChangeLog-2.6.11.1
A
From a purely process point of view, my concern would be making sure
that everything that goes into 2.6.X.Y (e.g. 2.6.11.1) makes it into
2.6.X+1 (e.g. 2.6.12).
--
Ian Pilcher[EMAIL
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintain a 2.6.x.y set of
releases that happen after 2.6.x is released.
Just to test things out a bit...
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
planning on sending them in for
On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 12:53 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
See the comments above the part you snipped off, that stated the
infrastructure is still being worked on :)
Damn, I somehow missed that paragraph. Well, I've read the whole darn
thread and still am getting work done. I guess I've
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:44:31PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintain a 2.6.x.y set of
releases that happen after 2.6.x is released.
Just to test things out a bit...
Here's the list of things which we might
fr den 04.03.2005 Klokka 12:44 (-0800) skreiv Andrew Morton:
nfsd--sgi-921857-find-broken-with-nohide-on-nfsv3.patch
nfsd--exportfs-reduce-stack-usage.patch
nfsd--svcrpc-add-a-per-flavor-set_client-method.patch
nfsd--svcrpc-rename-pg_authenticate.patch
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that was going to be
errata-only.
Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
Hm, odds are the nfsd one
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
I'll just pull from the sucker-tree.
That tree has
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:44:31PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2.
...
nfsd--exportfs-reduce-stack-usage.patch
...
Different people want different things with our 2.6.x.y.
I would hope that criteria include (i) patch is obvious,
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
I'll just
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel history which simply
should not have been there.
Is this really a big deal?
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel history which simply
should not have been there.
Is this really a big deal?
Once? No. If it ends up being par for the course, it's bad.
Andrew Morton wrote:
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that was going to be
errata-only.
Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
linux-release team
rapidly, and more invasive stuff will land only
in linux-2.6 when the invasive stuff is ready to go. It even takes the
pressure off pushing invasive stuff ASAP.
Have you pushed linux-2.6.11.1 upstream yet? :)
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:44:31PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
wrt the nfsd patches, Neil said:
The problem they fix is that currently:
Client A holds a lock
Client B tries to get the lock and blocks
Client A drops the lock
**Client B doesn't get the lock immediately,
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
I'll just pull from the sucker-tree.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
I'll just pull from the sucker-tree.
That tree has the not-for-linus raid6 fix and the not-for-linus i8042 fix.
-
To unsubscribe
Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
cramfs-small-stat2-fix.patch
setup_per_zone_lowmem_reserve-oops-fix.patch
dv1394-ioctl-retval-fix.patch
ppc32-compilation-fixes-for-ebony-luan-and-ocotea.patch
nfsd--sgi-921857-find-broken-with-nohide-on-nfsv3.patch
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:51:13PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
cramfs-small-stat2-fix.patch
setup_per_zone_lowmem_reserve-oops-fix.patch
dv1394-ioctl-retval-fix.patch
ppc32-compilation-fixes-for-ebony-luan-and-ocotea.patch
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:34:22PM -0600, Ian Pilcher wrote:
From a purely process point of view, my concern would be making sure
that everything that goes into 2.6.X.Y (e.g. 2.6.11.1) makes it into
2.6.X+1 (e.g. 2.6.12).
It will be so.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
