Could anyone elaborate on the status of this patch? I've had 344 days of uptime
on a PPC
powerbook using it on 2.4.22 and about 3 months of solid use on 2.6.
If the code looks problematic could someone point out possible deficiencies so
we can work
toward a satisfactory resolution? I didn't write
Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Saturday 26 February 2005 20:10, Eric Gaumer wrote:
If the code looks problematic could someone point out possible
deficiencies so we can work toward a satisfactory resolution? I didn't
write the code but I'm willing do what I have to in order to get this
David Gibson wrote:
This looks like the ancient version of the monitor patch - which
includes importing a lot of needless junk from the linux-wlan-ng
tree. A cleaned up version of monitor has been merged in the orinoco
CVS tree for ages now, but unfortunately that's long overdue for a
merge with m
Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 02:45:49PM -0800, Eric Gaumer wrote:
What is the difference between u* and uint*_t ? Both are derived from the
same basic data type.
typedef unsigned char __u8;
typedef __u8uint8_t;
And...
typedef unsigned char u8;
Don't use the ui
Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 08:23:39AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
So what's the problem with this approach? It would seem to make everybody
happy: it would reduce my load, it would give people the alternate "2.6.x
base kernel plus fixes only" parallell track, and it would _not_ have th
5 matches
Mail list logo
