From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1CZQev-0006C7-Hf for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 01 Dec 2004 01:20:25 -0800 Received: from hirsch.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.6] ident=root) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.41) id 1CZQeu-0003As-CF for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 01 Dec 2004 01:20:25 -0800 From: Gerd Knorr Message-ID: <20041201090203.GD12963@bytesex> References: <20041130200845.2C5058BAFE@zion.localdomain> <20041130152017.129e134c.akpm@osdl.org> <200412010120.39579.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200412010120.39579.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> Subject: [uml-devel] Re: VFS interactions with UML and other big UML changes (was: Re: [patch 1/2] Uml - first part rework of run_helper() and users.) Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:02:03 +0100 To: Blaisorblade Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jdike@addtoit.com, bstroesser@fujitsu-siemens.com, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > uml-terminal-cleanup.patch > > I don't know technically this one. It won't probably go in 2.6.10, I think > later... tested in the SuSE tree, but let's be quiet in merging _big_ things, > ok? It was also tested in a different tree, so it perfectly working on 2.6.9 > does not mean perfectly working on current kernels. Tested by me on 2.6.10-rc2-bk as well. It needed some trivial adaptions to the tty layer changes done by Linus compared to the old 2.6.9 version. I'm pretty confident it wouldn't break anything, but as it is to big to be classified as ObviouslyCorrect[tm] fix it probably should not go to into 2.6.10 but be merged in the 2.6.11 cycle. Gerd -- #define printk(args...) fprintf(stderr, ## args) ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261346AbULAJUg (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2004 04:20:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261348AbULAJUf (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2004 04:20:35 -0500 Received: from hirsch.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.6]:8379 "EHLO hirsch.in-berlin.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261346AbULAJUb (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2004 04:20:31 -0500 X-Envelope-From: kraxel@bytesex.org Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:02:03 +0100 From: Gerd Knorr To: Blaisorblade Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jdike@addtoit.com, bstroesser@fujitsu-siemens.com, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: VFS interactions with UML and other big UML changes (was: Re: [patch 1/2] Uml - first part rework of run_helper() and users.) Message-ID: <20041201090203.GD12963@bytesex> References: <20041130200845.2C5058BAFE@zion.localdomain> <20041130152017.129e134c.akpm@osdl.org> <200412010120.39579.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200412010120.39579.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > uml-terminal-cleanup.patch > > I don't know technically this one. It won't probably go in 2.6.10, I think > later... tested in the SuSE tree, but let's be quiet in merging _big_ things, > ok? It was also tested in a different tree, so it perfectly working on 2.6.9 > does not mean perfectly working on current kernels. Tested by me on 2.6.10-rc2-bk as well. It needed some trivial adaptions to the tty layer changes done by Linus compared to the old 2.6.9 version. I'm pretty confident it wouldn't break anything, but as it is to big to be classified as ObviouslyCorrect[tm] fix it probably should not go to into 2.6.10 but be merged in the 2.6.11 cycle. Gerd -- #define printk(args...) fprintf(stderr, ## args)