From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: 2.6.26-rc9: Reported regressions from 2.6.25 Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 20:02:45 +0200 Message-ID: <200807062002.46863.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <200807061905.50261.rjw@sisk.pl> <20080706174006.GD21669@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080706174006.GD21669-re2QNgSbS3j4D6uPqz5PAwR5/fbUUdgG@public.gmane.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Adrian Bunk Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Natalie Protasevich , Kernel Testers List , Maximilian Engelhardt , Randy Dunlap , "Paul E. McKenney" , James Bottomley On Sunday, 6 of July 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 07:05:49PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > Also, in the next couple of days I'll be closing the bugs the reporters of > > which have been totally unresponsive. > >... > > If no action by us gets combined with automated weekly emails then > no responses to the latter is not an unexpected event. > > Such a submitter might be perfectly responsive to actual work on a bug > while really pissed off by getting the bug closed. > > Look e.g. at #10865 that had a 1 month gap in submitter responses, > but the actual problem is that noone of us ever bothered to look at > this Oops... > > I just did a run through all open 2.6.26-rc regressions, and I did not > find a single one where we seem to be waiting for some time for an > answer of the submitter. [1] The following are my candidates: 10629 10786 10815 10906 (the thread has apparently died) 11009 Thanks, Rafael