* Bill Davidsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >>nfsd--svcrpc-add-a-per-flavor-set_client-method.patch
> >
> >is this critical?
>
> Wasn't part of the Linus proposal that it had to fix an oops or
> non-functional feature?
We're working on the criteria, should have some updates
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Unless it's crashing for people, stack usage is IMO a wanted-fix not
needed-fix.
nfsd--svcrpc-add-a-per-flavor-set_client-method.patch
is this critical?
Wasn't part of the Linus proposal that it had to fix an oops or
non-functional feature?
--
-bill davidsen ([EMAIL PROT
On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 17:18 +, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sad, 2005-03-05 at 22:06, Lee Revell wrote:
> > Driver updates are a hard problem. Nothing annoys users more than
> > unsupported hardware. But if you aggressively add support for new
> > devices you can break things that have worked for age
On Sad, 2005-03-05 at 22:06, Lee Revell wrote:
> Driver updates are a hard problem. Nothing annoys users more than
> unsupported hardware. But if you aggressively add support for new
> devices you can break things that have worked for ages.
You can however plan for them in advance. Guess why the
Shawn Starr wrote:
Sure, I can do this. Wrt to trivial patches, will these patches that go into
rusty's patch bot go into Linus's tree or into the -mm tree?
The reason I ask that is because a trivial patch may fix an oops if there's an
off-by-one problem and typically I'd submit that to the tr
Sure, I can do this. Wrt to trivial patches, will these patches that go into
rusty's patch bot go into Linus's tree or into the -mm tree?
The reason I ask that is because a trivial patch may fix an oops if there's an
off-by-one problem and typically I'd submit that to the trivial patch bot.
T
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 01:16:10AM -0500, Shawn Starr wrote:
> Sounds great, I can be a QA resource for what machines I have.
>
> How do people get involved in QAing these releases?
Get the last release and test it out. If you have problems, and have
simple/obvious patches, send them on.
than
; >
> >
> >Is this really a big deal?
>
> If you are pushing linux-release to Linus/Andrew rapidly, quick fixes
> will land in linux-2.6 rapidly, and more invasive stuff will land only
> in linux-2.6 when the invasive stuff is ready to go. It even takes the
> pressure of
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 02:53:43AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel hist
On Saturday 05 March 2005 17:06, Lee Revell wrote:
>On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 16:49 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> What he said! Perfectly good patches, which fix real problems
>> would appear to be sitting in testing/broken_out till bit rot or
>> ???.
>>
>> If you want a testers testimony, I'm running
On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 16:49 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> What he said! Perfectly good patches, which fix real problems would
> appear to be sitting in testing/broken_out till bit rot or ???.
>
> If you want a testers testimony, I'm running the bk-ieee1394.patch,
> and all I can say at this poin
On Saturday 05 March 2005 16:17, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Russell King wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:40:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> > I love BK, but what BK does well is merging and maintaining
>> > trees full of good stuff. What BK sucks at is experimental stuff
>
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Russell King wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:40:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I love BK, but what BK does well is merging and maintaining trees full of
> > good stuff. What BK sucks at is experimental stuff where you don't know
> > whether something should be e
ltivec.uc|4
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Summary of changes from v2.6.11 to v2.6.11.1
========
Dmitry Torokhov:
o Fix keyboards for Dell machines
Greg Kroah-Hartman:
o Linux 2.6.11.1
Olof Johansson:
o Fix for trivial fix
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Yup, BK could definitely handle that...
However, it's also true that the thing BK is _worst_ at is cherry-picking
things, and having a collection of stuff where somebody may end up vetoing
one patch and saying "remove that one".
So it
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Yup, BK could definitely handle that...
However, it's also true that the thing BK is _worst_ at is cherry-picking
things, and having a collection of stuff where somebody may end up vetoing
one patch and saying "remove that one".
In gen
On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:40:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I love BK, but what BK does well is merging and maintaining trees full of
> good stuff. What BK sucks at is experimental stuff where you don't know
> whether something should be eventually used or not.
Wait a minute - why would st
On Sat, 5 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> Yup, BK could definitely handle that...
However, it's also true that the thing BK is _worst_ at is cherry-picking
things, and having a collection of stuff where somebody may end up vetoing
one patch and saying "remove that one".
So it's entirely pos
Russell King wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:05:18PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
That tree has the not-for-linus raid6 fix and the not-for-linus i8042 fix.
Then when the authors of those patches go to submit the fix to Linus,
they can rever
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:05:18PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > That tree has the not-for-linus raid6 fix and the not-for-linus i8042 fix.
>
> Then when the authors of those patches go to submit the fix to Linus,
> they can revert them,
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel history which simply
> > > should not have been there.
> >
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:51:13PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> > > is this critical?
> >
> > Doubt it, unless the succeeding patches have a dependency on it. But the
> > other patches have not been tested w
Sounds great, I can be a QA resource for what machines I have.
How do people get involved in QAing these releases?
What other help?
Shawn.
> List: linux-kernel
> Subject: Linux 2.6.11.1
> From: Greg KH
> Date: 2005-03-04 17:53:02
> Message-ID: <2005
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 03:48:20PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 09:53 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > ---
> >
> > I've released the 2.6.11.1 patch:
> > kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/v2.6.11/patch-2.6.11.1.gz
> >
> > With a detailed changelog at:
>
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:15:37PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I
> > > was
> > > planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that was going to be
> > > errata-only.
> >
> > Ok,
Andrew Morton wrote:
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintain a 2.6.x.y set of
releases that happen after 2.6.x is released.
Just to test things out a bit...
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
planning on s
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:15:37PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2.
> > > > I was
> > > > planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:54:02PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:15:37PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2.
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:34:22PM -0600, Ian Pilcher wrote:
> From a purely process point of view, my concern would be making sure
> that everything that goes into 2.6.X.Y (e.g. 2.6.11.1) makes it into
> 2.6.X+1 (e.g. 2.6.12).
It will be so.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubsc
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:51:13PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > cramfs-small-stat2-fix.patch
> > > setup_per_zone_lowmem_reserve-oops-fix.patch
> > > dv1394-ioctl-retval-fix.patch
> > > ppc32-compilation-fixes-for-ebony-luan-and-ocotea.patch
> > > n
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > cramfs-small-stat2-fix.patch
> > setup_per_zone_lowmem_reserve-oops-fix.patch
> > dv1394-ioctl-retval-fix.patch
> > ppc32-compilation-fixes-for-ebony-luan-and-ocotea.patch
> > nfsd--sgi-921857-find-broken-with-nohide-on-nfsv3.patch
> > nfsd--exportfs-red
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > >
> > > Ok, care to forward them on?
> >
> > Sure. How do they get to Linus?
>
> I'll just pull from the sucker-tree.
>
That tree has the not-for-linus raid6 fix and the not-for-linus i8042 fix.
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > Ok, care to forward them on?
>
> Sure. How do they get to Linus?
I'll just pull from the sucker-tree.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTE
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:44:31PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> wrt the nfsd patches, Neil said:
>
> The problem they fix is that currently:
> Client A holds a lock
> Client B tries to get the lock and blocks
> Client A drops the lock
> **Client B doesn't get the lock immedi
rapidly, and more invasive stuff will land only
in linux-2.6 when the invasive stuff is ready to go. It even takes the
pressure off pushing invasive stuff ASAP.
Have you pushed linux-2.6.11.1 upstream yet? :)
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
Andrew Morton wrote:
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
> planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that was going to be
> errata-only.
Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
linux-release team sh
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel history which simply
> > should not have been there.
>
> Is this really a big deal?
Once? No. If it ends up being "par for the course", it's
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 02:36:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> But we end up with a cset in the permanent kernel history which simply
> should not have been there.
Is this really a big deal?
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, care to forward them on?
> > > >
> > > > Sure. How do th
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:44:31PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2.
...
> nfsd--exportfs-reduce-stack-usage.patch
...
Different people want different things with our 2.6.x.y.
I would hope that criteria include (i) patch is obvious
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:59:33PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Ok, care to forward them on?
> > >
> > > Sure. How do they get to Linus?
> >
> > I'll just pull from the sucker-
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
> > planning on sending them in for 2.6.12 when that was going to be
> > errata-only.
>
> Ok, care to forward them on?
Sure. How do they get to Linus?
> Hm, odds are the nfs
fr den 04.03.2005 Klokka 12:44 (-0800) skreiv Andrew Morton:
> nfsd--sgi-921857-find-broken-with-nohide-on-nfsv3.patch
> nfsd--exportfs-reduce-stack-usage.patch
> nfsd--svcrpc-add-a-per-flavor-set_client-method.patch
> nfsd--svcrpc-rename-pg_authenticate.patch
> nfsd--svcrpc-move-export-table-chec
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:44:31PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintain a 2.6.x.y set of
> > releases that happen after 2.6.x is released.
>
> Just to test things out a bit...
>
> Here's the list of things whi
On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 12:53 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> See the comments above the part you snipped off, that stated the
> infrastructure is still being worked on :)
>
Damn, I somehow missed that paragraph. Well, I've read the whole darn
thread and still am getting work done. I guess I've overexte
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintain a 2.6.x.y set of
> releases that happen after 2.6.x is released.
Just to test things out a bit...
Here's the list of things which we might choose to put into 2.6.11.2. I was
planning on sending them in f
From a purely process point of view, my concern would be making sure
that everything that goes into 2.6.X.Y (e.g. 2.6.11.1) makes it into
2.6.X+1 (e.g. 2.6.12).
--
Ian Pilcher[EMAIL PROT
On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 09:53 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> ---
>
> I've released the 2.6.11.1 patch:
> kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/v2.6.11/patch-2.6.11.1.gz
>
> With a detailed changelog at:
> kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/v2.6.11/ChangeLog-2.6.11.1
>
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 08:28:58PM +0100, Paolo wrote:
> Out of curiosity, are you going to include the -as branch ?
The whole thing? No, see previous comments about the contents of the
-as and -ac "branches" in the big lkml thread.
But if people will forward on bits and pieces of the -as and -a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greg KH wrote:
| On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 08:28:58PM +0100, Paolo wrote:
|
|>Out of curiosity, are you going to include the -as branch ?
|
|
| The whole thing? No, see previous comments about the contents of the
| -as and -ac "branches" in the big lkml
Paolo wrote:
Out of curiosity, are you going to include the -as branch ?
The -as stuff should be built on top of 2.6.11.X.
2.6.11.X should not be "every fix under the sun, until 2.6.12 is released."
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
| For those of you who haven't waded through the huge "RFD: Kernel release
| numbering" thread on lkml to realize that we are now going to start
| putting out 2.6.x.y releases, here's the summary:
|
| A few of us $suckers will be trying to maintai
===
Dmitry Torokhov:
o Fix keyboards for Dell machines
Greg Kroah-Hartman:
o Linux 2.6.11.1
Olof Johansson:
o Fix for trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec
Rene Rebe:
o trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 09:53:02AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> I'll also be replying to this message with a copy of the patch itself,
> as it is small enough to do so.
Here it is
diff -Nru a/Makefile b/Makefile
--- a/Makefile 2005-03-04 09:27:15 -08:00
+++ b/Makefile 2005-03-04 09:27:15 -08:00
54 matches
Mail list logo
