On Sun, 2006-10-08 19:59:08 +0200, Adrian Bunk <[email protected]> wrote: > > Read the bug report: Seems it > > was actually caused by a non-initialized variable introduced by a > > patch to util-linux. > > It was the sum of two independent bugs, and one of them was a kernel bug. Without reading the sources but only the bug report, my impression is that the kernel code is correct. MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw [email protected] +49-172-7608481 Signature of: "really soon now": an unspecified period of time, likly to the second : be greater than any reasonable definition of "soon".
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- References:
- Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- From: "Pekka Enberg" <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- From: Jan-Benedict Glaw <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- Prev by Date: Re: x60 backlight Re: [discuss] 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- Next by Date: Re: Hang in fb_notifier_call_chain with nvidia framebuffer
- Previous by thread: Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- Next by thread: Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)
- Index(es):