31 Ara 2006 Paz 02:47 tarihinde, Adrian Bunk şunları yazmıştı:
[...]
> Subject: ALSA: No sound in KDE with intel hda
> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/30/73
> Submitter : Ismail Dönmez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Status : unknown
Just tried with 2.6.18.6 and aRts still have no sound,
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc2 compared to 2.6.19
that are not yet fixed in Linus' tree.
If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one
of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch
of you caused a breakage or I'm considering
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 10:21:36PM -0300, Horst H. von Brand wrote:
> Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Subject: BUG at fs/buffer.c:1235 when using gdb
> > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/17/134
> > Submitter : Andrew J. Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Fixed-By
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Subject: BUG at fs/buffer.c:1235 when using gdb
> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/17/134
> Submitter : Andrew J. Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Fixed-By : Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Commit : 8701ea957dd2a7c309e17c8dcde
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 01:14:13PM -0500, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
>
> > There's also http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/21/47; the included patch break
> > my nVidia devices and probably all PCIX devices, so it's not right, but
> > something has to be done to
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 01:07:10PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 23:39 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc2 compared to 2.6.19.
> >
> > If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one
> > of the bugs, mainta
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 01:14:13PM -0500, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> There's also http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/21/47; the included patch break
> my nVidia devices and probably all PCIX devices, so it's not right, but
> something has to be done to fix ATI. My guess is a quirk to say that
> pci_int
There's also http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/21/47; the included patch break
my nVidia devices and probably all PCIX devices, so it's not right, but
something has to be done to fix ATI. My guess is a quirk to say that
pci_intx doesn't work on certain devices and should just be skipped, but
I'm not
On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 23:39 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc2 compared to 2.6.19.
>
> If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one
> of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch
> of you caused a b
On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 08:51:06PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Horst H. von Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:36:02 -0300
>
> > Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc2 compared to 2.6.19.
> >
> > Add that on S
On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 10:36:02PM -0300, Horst H. von Brand wrote:
> Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc2 compared to 2.6.19.
>
> Add that on SPARC64 boot fails due to missing /dev/root. Vanilla 2.6.19 and
> 2.6.19.1 work fine, before 2.
From: "Horst H. von Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:36:02 -0300
> Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc2 compared to 2.6.19.
>
> Add that on SPARC64 boot fails due to missing /dev/root. Vanilla 2.6.19 and
> 2.6.19.1 wo
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc2 compared to 2.6.19.
Add that on SPARC64 boot fails due to missing /dev/root. Vanilla 2.6.19 and
2.6.19.1 work fine, before 2.6.20-rc1 it broke. I checked the initrds for
both versions, the only differenc
On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 03:17:53PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >
> > In Linus' tree, it currently only depends on EXPERIMENTAL.
> >
> > It seems commit 009af1ff78bfc30b9a27807dd0207fc32848218a wasn't intended
> > for Linus?
>
> I think we shoul
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> In Linus' tree, it currently only depends on EXPERIMENTAL.
>
> It seems commit 009af1ff78bfc30b9a27807dd0207fc32848218a wasn't intended
> for Linus?
I think we should just remove it.
It's broken.
Nobody cares.
If people want to do concurrent stuf
On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 02:57:06PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 11:39:09PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >
> > Subject: PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE breakage
> > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/12/21
> > Submitter : Ben Castricum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Caused-By : Greg K
On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 11:39:09PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> Subject: PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE breakage
> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/12/12/21
> Submitter : Ben Castricum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Caused-By : Greg Kroah-Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> commit 009af1ff78bfc3
This email lists some known regressions in 2.6.20-rc2 compared to 2.6.19.
If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one
of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch
of you caused a breakage or I'm considering you in any other way possibly
involve
18 matches
Mail list logo
