Re: kernel oops in cfi_cmdset_0002.c:do_write_one()...

[tglx@linutronix.de (Thomas Gleixner)]

On Thursday 08 April 2004 16:37, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Thu, 8 April 2004 15:29:09 +0200, Steven Scholz wrote:
> > I just notice that in my old 2.4.20 kernel tree I have a
> >
> > 	* $Id: cfi_cmdset_0002.c,v 1.67 2003/04/15 22:32:13 thayne Exp $
> >
> > and in a _new_ 2.4.25 tree I have
> >
> > 	 * $Id: cfi_cmdset_0002.c,v 1.62 2003/01/24 23:30:13 dwmw2 Exp $
> >
> > How could that be !?!?
> >
> > Is the MTD code not pushed up into the main kernel sources???
>
> It is, whenever David finds the time for it.
>
> Don't blame him, this is the result of using CVS, which is designed
> around the assumption of a single central repository.  If current sync
> speed is to slow for you, try to make it easier for him to send
> patches forward.

I don't know, if he is really happy, if everybody starts to send patches 
upstream. He does a good job on this and he focussed more on 2.6 in the last 
months. But I'm sure that he can be convinced to bring 2.4 to the same state 
as 2.6 at least. On the other hand we live very well with the MTD patches 
since long, so what :) I never trust the kernel stuff of subsystems, which 
have a active development team :)

-- 
Thomas
________________________________________________________________________
"Free software" is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept,
you should think of "free" as in "free speech,'' not as in "free beer".
________________________________________________________________________
linutronix - competence in embedded & realtime linux
http://www.linutronix.de
mail: tglx@linutronix.de