Hi!
> > > IOW, someone needs to find a way to make the new code work like the old
> > > code without re-breaking Pavel's keyboard. But the bitchin-to-patchin
> > > ratio here seems to exclude that outcome.
> >
> > Traditionally that responsibility is in the hands of whose who break it in
> > the first place
>
> If that person cannot reproduce the problem but another skilled kernel
> developer can then it would make sense for he-who-can-reproduce-it to do
> some work.
>
> Still, I doubt if that's the case here.
>
>
> Is the below correct?
>
> Old behaviour:
>
> a) press alt
> b) press sysrq
> c) release alt
> d) press T
> e) release T
> f) release sysrq
>
> New behaviour:
>
> a) press alt
> b) press sysrq
> c) release sysrq
> d) press T
> e) release T
> f) release alt
Plus there was "very old" behaviour:
a) press alt
b) press sysrq
c) press T
d) release T
e) release sysrq
f) release alt
...that worked along with "old" behaviour....
> If so, then the old behaviour was weird and the new behaviour is sensible.
> What, actually, is the problem?
I'd agree. ...and was _real_ weird.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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]