On 8/27/07, Daniel Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > Now that I'm looking at the kernel bugzilla .. If you set the kernel > version to 2.6.22 and set the "Regression" check box you could denote > the fact that it's a regression in that kernel version .. > > I don't know if this URL is going to come out right, > > <snip url> > > That should be open bugs , kernel version 2.6.22, with the regression > check box set .. > > So you may not need a master tracking bug .. Yep, that's another way to do it. The method I described earlier is commonly used when you don't have the handy regression field in bugzilla. The technique is handy for creating lists for tracking other types of issues which don't necessarily fall into a component and you don't want to bother customizing bugzilla. I also suspect that there will be a number of common searches that many people will find useful. With recent versions of bugzilla (3.0+) you can share searches within groups, but it may be helpful to have a wiki or some other page where useful searches can be stored, or one of the templates edited to include those common searches. -Dave - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- From: "Natalie Protasevich" <[email protected]>
- Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- References:
- nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21
- From: Michal Piotrowski <[email protected]>
- Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- From: Michal Piotrowski <[email protected]>
- Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- From: "Michal Piotrowski" <[email protected]>
- Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- From: "Michal Piotrowski" <[email protected]>
- Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch 0/6] Per cpu structures for SLUB
- Next by Date: Re: nfs4 filesystem mounted via the "bind" option reports wrong fstype
- Previous by thread: Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- Next by thread: Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)
- Index(es):