Here are some more fixes intended for 2.6.12 (and well tested). Can you merge
them soon, Andrew? Thanks.
The first is a particularly bad one since it shows up when you *start*
compiling UML (due to a quilt patch -> normal patch conversion problem, a
file wasn't actually deleted, but it was when applied through quilt). Was
this too quick a merge, maybe? What's your "merging policy" (if any) for
patches?
Also, I had marked some of the patches I sent as needing some staging time in
-mm (especially "uml: redo console locking"), while I had marked other ones
as needing immediate merge. Jeff instead has sent some "cleanup / groundwork
for future work" (which anyway were mostly trivial) together with some urgent
fixes.
Actually they aren't a problem (especially because UML has almost no support
for SMP) however this policy risks breaking things.
We had the exactly opposite problem for 2.6.10 release - some important fixes
which were sent by Jeff just before 2.6.10 release to be merged in it (but
which weren't explicitly marked as such) were merged in 2.6.10-mm1.
--
Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade
Skype user "PaoloGiarrusso"
Linux registered user n. 292729
http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade
-
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/
[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]
