From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-dev-return-13933-arch-gentoo-dev=gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org> Received: (qmail 5548 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2004 22:31:50 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 9 Jul 2004 22:31:50 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bj3uI-0008Rk-63 for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2004 22:31:50 +0000 Received: (qmail 22656 invoked by uid 89); 9 Jul 2004 22:31:49 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 5929 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2004 22:31:49 +0000 Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 15:29:01 -0700 From: Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> To: Gentoo Dev Mailing List <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> Message-ID: <20040709222901.GA6610@kroah.com> References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0407091512440.5899@stargazer.weeve.org> <20040709212736.GA5669@kroah.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0407091545560.5899@stargazer.weeve.org> <20040709215832.GA6155@kroah.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0407091614320.5899@stargazer.weeve.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0407091614320.5899@stargazer.weeve.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] kernel team: please make up your mind X-Archives-Salt: 3c9a7b13-467f-401c-9b36-5554758e8e9a X-Archives-Hash: a714885230e6f6efc0ec895aad767e7b On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 04:17:45PM -0600, Jason Wever wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Greg KH wrote: > > > There was a bug marked for this. Sorry for being quick on it. I was > > also told a while ago that the sparc team had their own kernel. I never > > thought it was this one (as the metadata file sure didn't say that...) > > If I'm thinking of the same bug here, the sparc patch had nothing to do > with it. It wasn't even being used on the user's architecture. As far as > I know the user never really said it was fixed either. > > > > > - development-sources are clean kernel.org kernels > > Isn't this what vanilla-sources is for? It would be, but we don't have a 2.6 kernel in that package for some reason. If we can do that somehow, that would be fine with me. John, any problem with this instead? And if we do this, we can get rid of the development-sources pacakge entirely :) > > > > - gentoo-dev-sources are the current 2.6 kernel trees for all > > > > arches. There is no cesspool of patches in there, and it is > > > > the kernel for the ppc64, amd64, x86, and a few other arches. > > > > Making it the sparc kernel too is no big deal. > > When we make changes like this in the future, please give us some headway. > > > > Again, sorry for the speed at which this happened, I am very sorry about > > it. > > Not to be a totally insensitive person, but until we have a chance to get > the patch worked into g-d-s, I'd strongly ask that the changes to > development sources be reverted. Ok, it's reverted now. Any timeline for sending the patches to me for g-d-s? If you have a pointer to them, I'll add them myself. thanks, greg k-h -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list