Re: 2.6.19-rc1: known regressions (v2)

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>]

On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:34:46PM +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-10-08 19:28:59 +0200, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 10:45:50AM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 01:05:48AM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > >> In any case, what the fuck gives you the right to appoint yourself judge
> > > >> and jury over kernel regressions?
> > > 
> > > On 10/8/06, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
> > > >I've given this right myself - everyone can always send any bug list he
> > > >wants to linux-kernel.
> > > 
> > > I don't see what the problem here is. As stated in the bug report, a
> > > patch signed off by you broke something in the kernel which is not yet
> > > fixed in -git. Aside from calling people "guilty", what Adrian is
> > > doing is a service to us all.
> > 
> > It seems the word "Guilty" was considered offensive by some people?
> 
> I'd find it offensive, too, when I'd be called "guilty" because a
> patch broke something that was buggy.

Some people have no problem being called

  Didn't do anything, the scurvy lad. Ahoy!

while other people consider the word "Guilty" quite offensive.

All I can say is that my list is not meant in any was as an offence - 
bugs always happen when writing software, and the intention of my list 
is simply to summarize as much information as possible about known 
regressions.

> Read the bug report: Seems it
> was actually caused by a non-initialized variable introduced by a
> patch to util-linux.

It was the sum of two independent bugs, and one of them was a kernel bug.

> > This wasn't my intention, and I've replaced it with "Caused-By".
> 
> Made-visible-by :)
> 
> MfG, JBG

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed