From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 12:03:33 +0100
>
> * Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Well you can also apply it right now, then it's done and life can go
> > on.
>
> which part of the "it's an unnecessary distraction" concept didnt you
> understand?
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well you can also apply it right now,
...
> We are in -rc6 and all the codebase is in deep freeze. Delay
> your patch to when the 2.6.25 merge window starts
I suggest Jan adds the explanation from
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/1/2/26
* Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 2 2008 13:42, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >>
> >> A cleanup. Or perhaps a precautionary change, should unsigned long
> >> long ever become something that is not 64-bit. It was intended for
> >> 2.6.25
On 1/3/08, Stefan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
> > This is something i was thinking to suggest.
> > Kernel is made of a lot of different "areas" and the regression list
> > is a great tool for monitoring every single area so why not opening a
> > new branch and accep
Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
> This is something i was thinking to suggest.
> Kernel is made of a lot of different "areas" and the regression list
> is a great tool for monitoring every single area so why not opening a
> new branch and accepting patches only for areas which are not in the
> current regr
On 1/3/08, Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2.6.25 actually. You don't take patches this early, do you?
>
> Yeah, no, I don't take patches early. I've considered setting up another
> branch for early patches, but decided that I'm (a) lazy and (b) better off
> encouraging people in the
On Jan 2 2008 13:42, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>
>> A cleanup. Or perhaps a precautionary change, should unsigned long
>> long ever become something that is not 64-bit. It was intended for
>> 2.6.25 actually. You don't take patches this early, do you?
>
>Yea
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> A cleanup. Or perhaps a precautionary change, should unsigned long
> long ever become something that is not 64-bit. It was intended for
> 2.6.25 actually. You don't take patches this early, do you?
Yeah, no, I don't take patches early. I've considere
On Jan 2 2008 12:52, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>
>> please cherrypick 35f2e577e432b28969710bc1fd4d9a4c0875f81b from
>> the git://computergmbh.de/linux repository from the "netfilter"
>> branch (or use patch below).
>
>Umm. This is missing an explanation of
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> please cherrypick 35f2e577e432b28969710bc1fd4d9a4c0875f81b from
> the git://computergmbh.de/linux repository from the "netfilter"
> branch (or use patch below).
Umm. This is missing an explanation of what exactly cares.. Does it
actually fix some b
Hi Linus,
please cherrypick 35f2e577e432b28969710bc1fd4d9a4c0875f81b from
the git://computergmbh.de/linux repository from the "netfilter"
branch (or use patch below).
thanks,
Jan
==
commit 35f2e577e432b28969710bc1fd4d9a4c0875f81b
Author: Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed J
11 matches
Mail list logo
