-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ingo Molnar wrote:Yes, as we both agree, there are still such machines out there. The real problem is: what to do if somebody complains? If we would have the extra flag such people could be accommodated. If there is no such flag then distributions cannot just add the flag (it's part of the kernel API) and they would be caught between a rock and a hard place. Option #2 provides the biggest flexibility. I upstream kernel truly doesn't care about such machines anymore there are two options: - - really do nothing at all - - at least reserve a flag in case somebody wants/has to implement option #2 - -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkijA+4ACgkQ2ijCOnn/RHRhLQCdGNvwikwY4hMHBuYUP4WDqsy3 cfcAn2hrN1MoOkN3UIC4iSUCtqD2Yl6W =yG5T -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --
| Andrew Morton | -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
| david | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.27-rc5 |
| Bart Van Assche | Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
git: | |
| David Miller | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Lennert Buytenhek | [PATCH 16/39] mv643xx_eth: get rid of ETH_/ethernet_/eth_ prefixes |
