Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!
news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.tele.dk!
small.news.tele.dk!129.240.148.23!uio.no!nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!
internet-mailinglist
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org>
From: Nathan Russell <reddo...@chartermi.net>
Reply-To: reddo...@chartermi.net
To: reddo...@chartermi.net
Subject: Linux Kernel-2.4.18-nj1
Original-Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 01:50:52 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2]
Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed;
boundary="------------Boundary-00=_TODGH3TTY8CDL6XZDLCM"
Original-Message-ID: <auto-000044301786@front1.chartermi.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Organization: Internet mailing list
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 06:49:29 GMT
Message-ID: <fa.ike8nqv.103cc95@ifi.uio.no>
Lines: 46
Location of Linux Kernel-2.4.18-nj1 is
www.geocities.com/camel_10.geo/linux/patch-2.4.18-nj1.gz
ChangeLog Linux Kernel-2.4.18-nj1
* Merge 2.4.18-pre1
* Fix RadeonFb so it will compile (Nick Kurshev)
* RPM build updated for current RPM (Phillip Dalrmple)
* i810 audio fixed lock up's (Doug Ledford)
* Fixed return of blkgetsize64 (Eric Sandeen)
* Fixed cdrw drive's from hanging on initial INQUIRY
| driver 53c700 Scsi (James Bottomley)
* Fixed Sysrq key's so that you may see the correct output
| (Harald Holzer)
* 2.4.17-10c Reverse VM mapping (Rik van Riel)
* Fixed missing Scsi device ID (Stefan Wieseckel)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!
newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!
129.240.148.23!uio.no!nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org>
From: Willy Tarreau <wtarr...@free.fr>
Original-Message-Id: <200201051052.g05AqLb01141@ns.home.local>
Subject: Re: Linux Kernel-2.4.18-nj1
To: reddo...@chartermi.net
Original-Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 11:52:21 +0100 (CET)
Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Organization: Internet mailing list
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 10:54:00 GMT
Message-ID: <fa.f478rpv.t70ar0@ifi.uio.no>
Lines: 62
> Location of Linux Kernel-2.4.18-nj1
Hi Nathan,
Please don't take it bad, I don't want to flame you nor anybody, but I
think that if everyone publicly announces his own tree with his own set
of changes against the main kernel, many users will be lost quickly.
Once, we had "only" 3 main trees for the stable release :
- Linus' official kernels
- Alan's who did an excellent job at combining a stable core with experimental
drivers
- Andrea's kernel which is more oriented towards big servers and very high
loads.
Now that Alan is working on something else, I can easily understand that
people need a branch like the one he maintained, even if the majority of his
work has been merged into the main tree.
But there is now an -mjc tree, an -nj tree, perhaps others I missed, and many
more not announced here (-wt, I remember of Mathias Andree's -ma for example
who may have been the first one to merge ext3 and reiserfs into a same kernel).
All of them include nearly the same set of fixes that have not yet got into
the official kernel, plus a set of more-or-less stable, more-or-less
interesting features (depending who the targets are). At least, each one
should announce the goal of his kernel, and who it is intended to : developpers,
production users, desktop users, testers, all of them ? With your announce,
nobody even knows if he takes some particular risks using features from your
kernel. Example: I believe that at least Andre Pavenis still has problems with
Doug's i810_audio driver, so this cannot be annouced simply as a "fix" without
a little note.
I sure know it takes a lot of time maintaining a set of patches against a
mainstream kernel, and it even takes more time reading bug reports and
determining what is stable and what isn't. Not to tell about the dozens of
compilations before an announcement (because you compile them, don't you?),
and occasional porting of some fixes to other architectures.
So I really think it would be more productive if people worked around a
smaller set of trees, stopped editing patches by hand again and again to
resolve the same conflicts and tried to be a bit more understandable for
newbies who are a bit lost when they don't know what kernel to try.
Perhaps you could have sent your patches to Mickael Cohen to help him release
an -mjc2 more quickly, like we all did with Alan ? Or perhaps you have a clear
idea in mind about what your kernel tree will be, but in this case, please
elaborate on this a bit more than this simple post, and prepare to cope with
bug reports from people who will trust your tree. This last point may be the
major reason why I chose to keep my kernels for my friends and I...
I hope you didn't take it as an attack, it wasn't really against you, nor to
start a flame war, but just to make people think a bit about something more
constructive.
Regards,
Willy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!
news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!195.158.233.21!news.ebone.net!news1.ebone.net!
news.net.uni-c.dk!uninett.no!uio.no!nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org>
Original-Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 11:06:01 -0700
From: Tom Rini <tr...@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Willy Tarreau <wtarr...@free.fr>
Cc: reddo...@chartermi.net, linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux Kernel-2.4.18-nj1
Original-Message-ID: <20020105180601.GC756@cpe-24-221-152-185.az.sprintbbd.net>
Original-References: <200201051052.g05AqLb01...@ns.home.local>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200201051052.g05AqLb01141@ns.home.local>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i
Sender: linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Organization: Internet mailing list
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 18:07:33 GMT
Message-ID: <fa.jr62cbv.9hk63p@ifi.uio.no>
References: <fa.f478rpv.t70ar0@ifi.uio.no>
Lines: 38
On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 11:52:21AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > Location of Linux Kernel-2.4.18-nj1
>
> Hi Nathan,
>
> Please don't take it bad, I don't want to flame you nor anybody, but I
> think that if everyone publicly announces his own tree with his own set
> of changes against the main kernel, many users will be lost quickly.
>
> Once, we had "only" 3 main trees for the stable release :
> - Linus' official kernels
> - Alan's who did an excellent job at combining a stable core with experimental
> drivers
> - Andrea's kernel which is more oriented towards big servers and very high
> loads.
>
> Now that Alan is working on something else, I can easily understand that
> people need a branch like the one he maintained, even if the majority of his
> work has been merged into the main tree.
I'd actually argue against this. When Alan picked up 2.2.x, there
wasn't someone else doing an -ac'ish 2.2 release as well. Marcelo is
doing 2.4.x now, and seems to be doing a good job of making sure stable
stuff gets in, and other stuff doesn't. The only patches that won't
make it into Marcelos tree in the very-near-term (Which is all I'll
speculate about) are the preempt (and lock-break) patches.
Please people, more trees are not always a better thing when you're all
doing the same thing.
--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!
newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!
newshub1-work.rdc1.sfba.home.com!gehenna.pell.portland.or.us!
nntp-server.caltech.edu!nntp-server.caltech.edu!mail2news96
Newsgroups: mlist.linux.kernel
Message-ID: <linux.kernel.20020105194140.67038.qmail@web20504.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 20:41:40 +0100 (CET)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?willy=20tarreau?= <wtarr...@yahoo.fr>
Subject: Re: Linux Kernel-2.4.18-nj1
X-To: Tom Rini <tr...@kernel.crashing.org>
X-Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Approved: n...@nntp-server.caltech.edu
Lines: 54
Hello Tom,
> I'd actually argue against this. When Alan picked
> up 2.2.x, there wasn't someone else doing an -ac'ish
> 2.2 release as well.
Right, but at 2.2 times, there were less features and
less users than now. Preemption, PNPBios, Tux,
schedulers, additionnal filesystems are many features
that interest lots of people. Not that Alan did
include
them all either, but at least he gave the opportunity
to test some of them (think about ext3 and pnpbios).
> Marcelo is doing 2.4.x now, and seems to be doing a
> good job of making sure stable stuff gets in, and
> other stuff doesn't. The only patches that won't
> make it into Marcelos tree in the very-near-term
> (Which is all I'll speculate about) are the preempt
> (and lock-break) patches.
I totally agree. And that's why I find it still
acceptable to have one tree (and not 1000) to test
other features such as the ones above, so a large set
of users can test them (eg: filesystems).
> Please people, more trees are not always a better
> thing when you're all doing the same thing.
Perhaps people who have a solid personal tree would
like to continue this discussion off-list and find
an arrangement about a single test tree. Concerning
stable trees, I think that both Marcello's and
Andrea's are rock solid. Othe people may want to use
their distributor's.
I'll stop here to avoid decreasing the s/n ratio too
much. Off-list correspondance OK.
Regards,
Willy
PS: I really like your domain name, it could have been
dedicated to my tree :-)
___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Courrier : http://courrier.yahoo.fr
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!
newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!
newshub1-work.rdc1.sfba.home.com!gehenna.pell.portland.or.us!
nntp-server.caltech.edu!nntp-server.caltech.edu!mail2news96
Newsgroups: mlist.linux.kernel
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 14:42:31 -0700
From: Tom Rini <tr...@kernel.crashing.org>
X-To: willy tarreau <wtarr...@yahoo.fr>
X-Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux Kernel-2.4.18-nj1
Message-ID: <linux.kernel.20020105214231.GD756@cpe-24-221-152-185.az.sprintbbd.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Approved: n...@nntp-server.caltech.edu
Lines: 70
On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 08:41:40PM +0100, willy tarreau wrote:
> Hello Tom,
>
> > I'd actually argue against this. When Alan picked
> > up 2.2.x, there wasn't someone else doing an -ac'ish
> > 2.2 release as well.
>
> Right, but at 2.2 times, there were less features and
> less users than now. Preemption, PNPBios, Tux,
> schedulers, additionnal filesystems are many features
> that interest lots of people. Not that Alan did include
> them all either, but at least he gave the opportunity
> to test some of them (think about ext3 and pnpbios).
From what I remember, there were lots of other projects going on in 2.2
time, and lots of the stuff in 2.3 (think USB) was done with 2.2.x/2.3.x
compatibility glue. And of all of the things you listed above, they
should all work independantly of eachother too, for the most part.
> > Marcelo is doing 2.4.x now, and seems to be doing a
> > good job of making sure stable stuff gets in, and
> > other stuff doesn't. The only patches that won't
> > make it into Marcelos tree in the very-near-term
> > (Which is all I'll speculate about) are the preempt
> > (and lock-break) patches.
>
> I totally agree. And that's why I find it still
> acceptable to have one tree (and not 1000) to test
> other features such as the ones above, so a large set
> of users can test them (eg: filesystems).
But why do we need yet another tree for this? There already is a large
set of users testing the preemption patches, and I'm not aware of any
new filesystems yet, but I don't see why they'd need another tree
either. A lot of what the -ac tree did was provide maintainers another
person to give their patches to (since sending stuff to Linus is a hit
or miss thing for many people) that tended to have a high rate of
success (or comments) with Linus. Marcelo is very good about taking
patches from maintainers (and telling other people to send stuff to said
maintainer first).
> > Please people, more trees are not always a better
> > thing when you're all doing the same thing.
>
> Perhaps people who have a solid personal tree would
> like to continue this discussion off-list and find
> an arrangement about a single test tree. Concerning
> stable trees, I think that both Marcello's and
> Andrea's are rock solid. Othe people may want to use
> their distributor's.
Again I say, why do we need a 'test' tree? I really don't see more than
one large patch/project/feature getting into a final release, so testing
that project with a bunch of other projects actually invalidates the
testing of it.
> I'll stop here to avoid decreasing the s/n ratio too
> much. Off-list correspondance OK.
I'd really rather not just yet. I'm pretty sure this is all on-topic
still.
--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/