On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 04:07:08PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:So smbfs is still considered rock solid while no serious distribution would be crazy enough to ship the EXPERIMENTAL NFSv4 support to their customers? I'm not claiming that all EXPERIMENTAL tags were wrong [1], but many were wrong. Plus the fact that CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL controlled so many different things with one switch that CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL=n .config's are really rare. You removed the context. The fact that Andrew has not applied a three times sent patch does not necessarily imply there was any problem with a patch - "no answer" on linux-kernel always translates to "continue patchbombing". cu Adrian [1] after all, even with a random distribution many of them were right ;-) -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed --
| Bart Van Assche | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Greg KH | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
| Andrew Morton | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 -- sys_fallocate |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 03/37] dccp: List management for new feature negotiation |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Radu Rendec | htb parallelism on multi-core platforms |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
