On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 03:17:45AM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
> Jeff, I've looked at all other patches _names_ and they're patches which I
> already have, so I shouldn't have lost any other changes.
I think I didn't change any of your patches - any changes I made got
their own patches, so you should be safe.
> Plus, I've just done a couple of other cleanups of the TLS code, removing
> dead
> code which was there for experiments; I've implemented 2.4 host detection (I
> hope I've not forgot to check the host_supports_tls variable anywhere), and
> I'm ripping out global-ldt-sem which I longly hated (and which isn't easy to
> avoid).
Do you have a set of patches which are candidates for akpm? I'm
looking at
http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade/patches/guest/uml-2.6.15-bb6/broken-out/series
and that seems unsuitable, as some patches seem to reverse earlier
ones.
Jeff
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
