Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23

> Regressions are worse. It doesn't matter AT ALL if you think that it 
> breaks ten times more devices, if it's a regression and those devices 
> didn't work in the past, they simply DO NOT COUNT.

Must be time for an -ac tree again.

Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
    • From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
    • From: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 15s! [swapper:0]
• Next by Date: Re: [lm-sensors] 2.6.24-rc4 hwmon it87 probe fails
• Previous by thread: Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
• Next by thread: Re: 2.6.24-rc4-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.23
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]