From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:33:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:33:10 -0500 Received: from ns01.netrox.net ([64.118.231.130]:5106 "EHLO smtp01.netrox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:32:58 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] G550 config entry/help From: Robert Love To: David Weinehall Cc: marcelo@conectiva.com.br, torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20011221091352.G5235@khan.acc.umu.se> In-Reply-To: <1008892244.938.9.camel@phantasy> <20011221091352.G5235@khan.acc.umu.se> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0.0.99+cvs.2001.12.18.08.57 (Preview Release) Date: 21 Dec 2001 11:32:49 -0500 Message-Id: <1008952375.2040.0.camel@phantasy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2001-12-21 at 03:13, David Weinehall wrote: > I'd say there's some loss of information here. Is that intentional? > That is, has G100 been tested and G450 been confirmed to work properly? Yes and yes. Robert Love