On Sunday, 17 June 2007 12:22, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> On 17/06/07, Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:41:36 +0200 Michal Piotrowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > +If the patch introduces a new regression and this regression was not fixed
> > > +in seven days, then the patch will be reverted.
> >
> > Those regressions where we know which patch caused them are the easy ones.
Except when the bisection points us to a patch exposing a bug that is present
regardless (see http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/13/273 for example).
Besides, if a patch is merged before -rc1 as a bugfix, there are several
patches depending on it and only after -rc5 has been released we find out
that it breaks someone's system, then reverting it is not a solution, IMO.
> > Often we don't know which patch (or even which subsystem merge) is at
> > fault.
> >
> > I think. How many of the present 2.6.22-rc regressions which you're
> > presently tracking have such a well-identified cause?
> >
>
> Here lays the problem.
>
> git-bisect is a killer app, people should start using it.
People should test _all_ of the -rc kernels and report problems. Otherwise, we
may assume that there are no problems and go on.
Greetings,
Rafael
--
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth
-
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]
