On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 01:11:33AM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> Anything which isnt a strict bug fix or previously agreed is now 2.2.19
> material.
I needed to add this to get my kernel to compile. I was trying to
get pci_resource_start to be defined. It was only an issue with this
one object fil
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 02:57:01PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> ... VM-global-*-7 has no known bugs AFIK.
Is there anything more recent than VM-global-2.2.18pre18-7? It isn't
patching very cleanly against my pre-patch-2.2.18-23 tree.
(I don't see anything under your pre19 thru pre23 di
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 03:02:35PM -0800, John Kennedy wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 02:57:01PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > > ... VM-global-*-7 has no known bugs AFIK.
> >
> > Is ther
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:04:16AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 03:36:15PM -0800, John Kennedy wrote:
> > No, it is all ext3fs stuff that is touching the same areas your
>
> Ok this now makes sense. I ported VM-global-7 on top of ext3 right now
>
In trying to test the international crypto patch-2.2.17.11pre1 I was
doing some QA on my bootloader program. It looks like the loopback
device will return EOF before a file is finished.
In my case in particular, I was using files instead of block devices
(again, for testing) and had a nulled
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 05:34:28PM +0100, Andries Brouwer wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 04:56:59PM +0100, Jan Niehusmann wrote:
> > That means that if blk_size[major][MINOR(bh->b_rdev)] == 0, the request
> > is canceled but no message is printed. Shouldn't there be a warning message?
>
> Maybe
I've been having a problem with the 2.4.0 series (tested most recently
against test8-pre1)... there is a long (seems to be almost exactly
~60 seconds, but you have to be careful about racking up multiples)
delay trying to make outgoing connections, including pings:
root@pandora: time p
On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 06:17:08PM -0500, Kevin Krieser wrote:
> [me]
>>I've been having a problem with the 2.4.0 series (tested most recently
>> against test8-pre1)... there is a long (seems to be almost exactly
>> ~60 seconds, but you have to be careful about racking up multiples)
>> del
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 08:04:49AM +0200, Martin MaD Douda wrote:
> I'm using 2.4-test since it was born and never saw this behavior. Could
> you please strace and ltrace your ping so we can see where it waits?
Can't find source for ltrace, but I have strace.
Ping seems to be spending its ti
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 04:00:41PM -0400, Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, John Kennedy wrote:
> > Ping seems to be spending its time in a sendto()/poll() loop:
> >
> > sendto(3, "U\3Z\241\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\2\0\1\206\240\0\0\0\2\0\0\0\3\0"..., 56, 0,
>{
As a datapoint, I've had 2.4.0-test9pre6 up over 1.5 days doing
some serious compiling for a piece of that (probably a good 6-8 hours,
but I haven't timed it with my new AMD processor lately).
I'm running X 4.0.1. I don't know where the `c' and `d' bits you
guys are talking about is coming f
On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:32:18AM +, Jonathan Hudson wrote:
> Previously working in test10pre*, now gives many unresolved symbols: ...
I didn't get nearly that many. In fact, I only got this one:
...
-o vmlinux
drivers/pcmcia/pcmcia.o: In function `CardSer
On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 03:34:44PM -0500, Alexander Viro wrote:
> Unfortunately, it doesn't fix the thing. ->sync_page() is called ...
> Minimal patch (against -pre7) follows. It still leaves sync_page() problem
> open - any suggestions on that one are very welcome. ...
I needed to patch your p
13 matches
Mail list logo
