On Wed, 07 May 2008, Martin Knoblauch wrote:Well, at least a bugzilla entry makes it impossible for the information to be lost, so IMHO unless you get a patch right away, it is a good idea to open one. As for it helping someone to actually go and FIX the bug, no :-) -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh --
| Pardo | Re: pthread_create() slow for many threads; also time to revisit 64b context switc... |
| Paul Jackson | Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may have realtime uses) |
| Srivatsa Vaddagiri | Re: [PATCH, RFC] reimplement flush_workqueue() |
| Peter Zijlstra | Re: Btrfs v0.16 released |
git: | |
| Giuseppe Bilotta | Re: gitweb and remote branches |
| Miklos Vajna | [rfc] git submodules howto |
| JD Guzman | C# Git Implementation |
| Junio C Hamano | Re: [PATCH] fix parallel make problem |
| Richard Stallman | Real men don't attack straw men |
| Steve B | SSH brute force attacks no longer being caught by PF rule |
| GVG GVG | ssh_exchange_identification: Connection closed by remote host |
| Marius ROMAN | 1440x900 resolution problem |
| Tomasz Grobelny | [PATCH 0/5] [DCCP]: Queuing policies |
| Dushan Tcholich | Re: ksoftirqd high cpu load on kernels 2.6.24 to 2.6.27-rc1-mm1 |
| John Heffner | Re: A Linux TCP SACK Question |
| Denys Fedoryshchenko | Re: Could you make vconfig less stupid? |
