On 10/17/2014 02:27 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/17/2014 02:17 PM, John Stultz wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
A bug report came in against an older kernel which output "backward time"
>>
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>
>
> On 10/17/2014 02:17 PM, John Stultz wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>>> A bug report came in against an older kernel which output "backward time"
>>> messages and the report noted that the upstream ke
On 10/17/2014 02:17 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>> A bug report came in against an older kernel which output "backward time"
>> messages and the report noted that the upstream kernel worked. After some
>> investigation it turned out that one
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> A bug report came in against an older kernel which output "backward time"
> messages and the report noted that the upstream kernel worked. After some
> investigation it turned out that one of the sockets was bad on the system
> and the "ba
On 10/17/2014 09:57 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> A bug report came in against an older kernel which output "backward time"
> messages and the report noted that the upstream kernel worked. After some
> investigation it turned out that one of the sockets was bad on the system
> and the "backward t
A bug report came in against an older kernel which output "backward time"
messages and the report noted that the upstream kernel worked. After some
investigation it turned out that one of the sockets was bad on the system
and the "backward time" messages were caused by a real, but intermittent,
ha
6 matches
Mail list logo