would still need to
provide the sources for that, either in the product or via a written
offer.
scott
--
scott preece
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
.
>This gives the isoc_handler the opportunity to fill more
> frames
>in the mean time.
---
"mean time" -> "meantime"
---
> */
--
scott preece
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
seems over-careful, especially since you're applying it only to
the Review-by tag, while all the other tags would also have the same
concern.
--
scott preece
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
and there's no need to ask reviewers to decide whether their
opinion matters. In that view, "Acked-by" means "I have no objection
to this patch, but don't claim deep review" and "Reviewed-by" means "I
have no objection to this patch after a thorough rev
vironment). Preferably it should also have a description of
the test or test suite run and whether that test failed on an
unpatched system.
scott
--
scott preece
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
tc. and you use this code:
> +
...
> +be penalized heavily for going [sic] down the wrong path... Therefore, you
> +should consider also whether a seemingly-rare condition is indeed rare ALL
---
The hyphen isn't necessary when the first word of the compount
adjective is an adverb ending
- Original Message
From: Tim Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Rob Landley wrote:
Given that there are about 60,000 printks in the kernel (and that's
not counting wrappers like dprintk() and other locally-defined
functions and macros) it would be a huge task to examine the code
and differentiate
LessWatts.org effort and community.
>
>
> Arjan van de Ven
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> http://www.lesswatts.org
*sigh*
Noble cause - dreadful name. And it's ungrammatical, too - should have
been "FewerWatts" or "LessWattage". Or LessPower. Or it could ha
eloper time and LKML bandwidth
currently expended on arguing about formatting. Everybody could just
run things through indent with whatever formatting they preferred.
Might make diffs ugly, though...
scott
--
scott preece
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
to stand for election, simply send your nomination
> to:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ...
Could you post the list of who the current members are and which ones
hold the seats that are open this year?
thanks,
scott
--
scott preece
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu
gging.
Module support was not added for external modules.
Code that is being debugged is, often [usually, I hope], out-of-tree
code, though it may be aimed at future inclusion.
However, I do agree that there is value to having loadable modules for
in-tree functionality, too.
scott
--
scott preece
-
ld be
done to replace the current policy on a running system (perhaps to add
a new domain corresponding to a newly added service). Yes, this would
need to be done with a lot of care, but part of providing mechanism
(rather than policy) is enabling people to use the mechanism in the
ways they prefer.
On 6/19/07, Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
> Tivo didn't make the Linux success. More Tivos can definitely undo it.
>
I don't think so.
First, it's not Linux that made success, but rather GNU that uses Linux as
its kernel. And, believe it or not, when people say L
On 6/15/07, Tim Post <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 19:52 -0500, Scott Preece wrote:
>
> Yes, but in highlighting the possibility of evil intentions you
> distort the fact that usually there are no such evil intentions...
>
I don't think you can
On 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, "Scott Preece" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whether it's a legal requirement or a business decision, the result is
> the same - neither forcing the manufacturer to make the devic
On 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, "Scott Preece" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > * Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> That
On 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How do these stop a user's exercise of the four freedoms of a piece of
software licensed under the GPL?
---
I know you don't see it that way, but I still find it bizarre that
"the
On 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's correct, but with a catch: since the contract or license is
chosen by the licensor, in case of ambiguity in the terms, many courts
will interpret it in a way that privileges the licensee,
On 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, "Scott Preece" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> That's not true. They can just as well throw the key away and refrain
>> from modifying the installed software behind the users' bac
On 6/15/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 15, 2007, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it irreversibly cuts off certain people from being to distribute
> GPLv3-ed software alongside with certain types of hardware that the
> FSF's president does not like.
That's not tru
On 6/7/07, Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fix a typo in Documentation/keys.txt.
Signed-off-by: Satyam Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Documentation/keys.txt |5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
---
On 6/2/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 21:06:14 -0700 Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 19:57:41 -0700 Scott Preece wrote:
>
> > On 6/2/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > ...
>
On 6/2/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
+The Signed-off-by: tag implies that the signer was involved in the development
---
Change "implies" to "indicates" - it's an explicit statement, not an
implication.
---
+of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path.
+
+
On 6/1/07, Krzysztof Halasa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"John Anthony Kazos Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Indeed. Acked-by: implies authority, and only very few people should be
> able to do it. Namely, the only person who can ACK a patch is a person who
> could also NACK a patch and expect
On 5/26/07, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Based in part on Auke's patch.
Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Documentation/CodingStyle | 74 +++---
1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.22-rc
On 5/18/07, Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> bugs is one of the best ways to get merits among other developers, because
>> not many people like wasting time fixing other people's bugs.
> ^^^
>
> you might want t
On 5/23/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alan Cox wrote:
>> Google does not distribute their software, so they do not have to make
>> their modifications public.
>
> They do for the kernel - they produce an "appliance".
Ah, I stand corrected.
>> WRT the Linux kernel, Google is essent
On 5/21/07, Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:12:07PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Jarek Poplawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > - load will be directed), a data dependency barrier would be
required to
> > > > + load will be directed), the data
Hi,
Here is a patch to marker.txt to make the English read a little
better. I didn't change the references to out-of-tree packages.
@@ -3,33 +3,30 @@
Mathieu Desnoyers
- This document introduces to markers and discusses its purpose. It
-shows some usage example
On 5/9/07, Jonathan Corbet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK, here's an updated version of the volatile document - as a plain text
file this time. It drops a new file in Documentation/, but might it be
better as an addition to CodingStyle?
...
---
I think the size of this file is OK as a separate
On 5/1/07, Geert Uytterhoeven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 1 May 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> Actually, the latter style (one condition per line and the && or ||
> operators appearing _before_ the conditions in subsequent lines)
> is quite popular for multi-line compound conditions (well, I
On 4/6/07, Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[I can't believe I'm stepping into an indentation flamewar, but here goes...]
that the line with "bar" on it is properly indented with one tab
(since it is part of the if statement that is also indented one tab),
and then four spaces are used
On 4/6/07, Stefan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David Brownell wrote:
[...]
>>> 1 if (To control chain reactions, your odds
>>> 2 Improve if you've got cadmium rods) {
>>> 3 In your fission reactor
>>> 4 Their lack is a factor
>>> 5 }
>>> 6 In scre
On 2/17/07, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Per this principle, it would seem that only source code and
hand-crafted object code would be governed by copyright, since
compilation is also an automated process.
---
Well, compilation is probably equivalent to "translation", which is
sp
On 2/16/07, Dave Neuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/16/07, David Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> (See, among other cases, Lexmark. v. Static
> Controls.) A copyright is not a patent, you can only own something if there
> are multiple equally good ways to do it and you claim *one* of th
On 2/16/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:32:30 EST, "linux-os (Dick Johnson)" said:
Actually, the *real* reason embedded systems end up using old versions is
much simpler.
They start developing their code on release 2.X.Y, and they keep their code
out-of-
On 2/15/07, Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This definition seems to be a bit like nailing jelly to a tree in that so
far only one companies legal dept has pursued this to the point of
actually getting a court verdict rendered. That was the German ruling a
link was given to earlier in t
On 2/15/07, Geert Uytterhoeven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, v j wrote:
Personally, I see no real difference between EXPORT_SYMBOL and
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL.
If you derive from GPL'ed code, your code is a derived work.
---
I agree with you that there's no difference in law, tho
On 2/15/07, Miguel Ojeda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stupid, maybe. But some people just don't want closed-source
projects/companies like yours using their free work, without any kind
of feedback. Some others don't care, but they could in the future, as
it is their code, and that is your risk.
On 2/15/07, Theodore Tso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But so what? How will that hurt *Linux*? If the Embedded developers
don't contribute changes back, it doesn't hurt us any if they go away
and start paying $$$ to VxWorks instead of using Linux for free.
---
Well, this is somewhat oversimpli
On 2/15/07, Stuart MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Linus does allow for one exception; drivers written for other OSes
that happen to compile for Linux as well. I believe this is the POSIX
exception mentioned elsethread. However, from your description of
requiring GPL-only symbols, I'm prett
On 1/25/07, Alessandro Di Marco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Scott Preece" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On 1/25/07, Bodo Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Imagine one computer serving two users. Two monitors, two keyboards ...
---
Good point! Of l
On 1/25/07, Bodo Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Scott Preece <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My own hot button is making sure that the definition of what
> constitutes user activity is managed in exactly one place, whether in
> the kernel or not. My naive model would be t
On 1/24/07, Oleg Verych <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Scott Preece" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[]
> Hmm - Sounds like it needs to go to Halifax! [I was going to suggest
> Reykjavik, but was surprised to see it was in the same time zone as
> the UK.]
>
>
On 1/24/07, Martin Bligh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not just the cost of travel by any means - the extra travel time and
jetlag involved is huge - having everybody sleep through a conference is
distinctly less productive.
One of the advantages of the EST timezone locations is that it's at
On 1/23/07, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi1
...
>
>But I still believe it can be out.
>
> Do you believe it could be a user-space daemon or what?
Yes, what prevents userspace daemon watching /dev/input/event* to
provide this functionality?
On 1/19/07, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 19 2007 11:45, Scott Preece wrote:
> Hi, attached is a patch for your gentable file, rewriting some of the
> user prompts to make them more readable.
I still don't get why this is called "SIN" in the Kconfi
On 1/19/07, Alessandro Di Marco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The patch in attachment fixes some silly bugs of the previous version.
Regards,
Hi, attached is a patch for your gentable file, rewriting some of the
user prompts to make them more readable.
Regards,
scott
--- gentable 2007-01-19 11:
On 12/26/06, David Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You buy a phone for $200. The manufacturer only represents that it works
with CarrierCo. ...
You have the right to do what you like with the phone, of course. It's a
great doorstop and a reasonable paper weight. The manufacturer didn't
prom
On 12/26/06, David Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's really common sense. Imagine if you buy the right to use my car, but I
don't give you the key. Can I say, "yes, you have the right to use my car,
you bought that, but that doesn't mean I have to tell you how to use my
car."
---
I have
On 12/25/06, David Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If I bought the car from the manufacturer, it also must include any rights
the manufacturer might have to the car's use. That includes using the car to
violate emission control measures. If I didn't buy the right to use the car
that way (
On 12/22/06, Wolfgang Draxinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am Freitag, 22. Dezember 2006 20:22 schrieb Rok Markovic:
> Hi!
>
> Maybe this does not belong to this thread, but I am wondering why
> manufactorers doesn't want to release specifications about drivers
You're not alone, I think ever
On 12/21/06, David Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You say "It's rude to not play by our rules". They say "It's rude of
> you to expect us to change our business model to support your niche
> market differently from the way we support everyone else." Neither is
> wrong...
Honestly, I thin
On 12/21/06, Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Scott Preece" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But as it happens that driver does not work for a large segment
percentage of linux users who potentially could place the card in
their system. Did that driver suppor
On 12/18/06, Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We have a process that has worked for centuries to improve our
knowledge base. The scientific method and peer review. We use a
variation of this proven process for writing software in linux. The
binary only vendors are being rude and r
On 12/19/06, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Dec 19, 2006, "D. Hazelton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However I have a feeling that the lawyers in the employ of the
> companies that ship BLOB drivers say that all they need to do to
> comply with the GPL is to ship the glue-code in
On 12/20/06, David Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd agree that "ar", like "mkisofs", doesn't create a derived work, but I
> think that "objcopy" does create a derived work, and "ld" does too, by
> virtue of modifying the objects it takes to resolve symbols. ...
The question is, as a ma
On 12/18/06, David Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First sale has nothing to do with this. First sale applies to the
> redistribution or resale of copies you have purchased, not with the
> right to make additional copies.
First sale is exactly what this is about. Nobody needs to make "ad
On 12/18/06, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In other words, it means that we are pushing a agenda that is no longer
neither a technical issue (it's clearly technically _worse_ to not be able
to do something) _nor_ a legal issue.
So tell me, what does the proposed blocking actually do
On 12/18/06, David Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Static vs dynamic matters for whether it's an AGGREGATE work. Clearly,
> static linking aggregates the library with the other program in the same
> binary. There's no question about that. And that _does_ have meaning from
> a copyright law
On 12/15/06, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri 2006-12-15 08:52:22, Scott Preece wrote
>
> I think the mistake illuminates why parentheses should be the rule. If
> you're thinking about using spacing to convey grouping, use
> parentheses instead...
Not in sim
On 12/15/06, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi!
> Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> From: Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> +Use one space around (on each side of) most binary and ternary operators,
> >> +such as any of these:
> >> + = + - < > * / % | & ^ <= >= == != ? :
> >
On 12/14/06, Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Scott Preece wrote:
[1]
>> Outside of comments, documentation and except in Kconfig, spaces are
>> never
>> used for indentation, and the above example is deliberately broken.
> ---
>
> I realize it isn&
Outside of comments, documentation and except in Kconfig, spaces are never
used for indentation, and the above example is deliberately broken.
---
I realize it isn't text you added, but what's that supposed to mean?
Surely the 8-character indents are made up of spaces. Does it mean
"spaces ot
On 12/14/06, Chris Wedgwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 12:15:20PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Please don't use that name, it strikes me as much more confusing
> than EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, even though I agree that _GPL doesn't quite
> convey what it means, either.
Calling i
65 matches
Mail list logo
