From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from foo.stuge.se ([212.116.89.98]:40654 "HELO foo.stuge.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754129Ab2DPWfD (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2012 18:35:03 -0400 Message-ID: <20120416223459.18769.qmail@stuge.se> (sfid-20120417_003526_613947_7D929AE8) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:34:59 +0200 From: Peter Stuge To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Greg KH , "ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org" , linux-wireless Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, "John W. Linville" , Stefan Richter , akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] [ 00/78] 3.3.2-stable review References: <20120413105746.10ffb120@stein> <20120413190819.9469.qmail@stuge.se> <20120416162710.GA24100@kroah.com> <20120416205856.GA22298@kroah.com> <20120416212718.GA22824@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Felipe Contreras wrote: > With more people using Arch Linux and thus the latest "stable" > release, I'd say we might see an increase in these kinds of issues. You touch on an important point. Arch has it's own support channels, and after a few of these kinds of issues perhaps Arch will decide to push a different kernel to their users. None of the Arch users I know (though only a few) would have had a critical problem without wifi. What kernel to push to users is anyway a distribution problem, so if you must discuss then please discuss within the Arch community the pros and cons of the various available kernel trees. Maybe they will prefer another one than they currently do, after your reasoning. I personally don't care about what any distribution does; I just use Linus' tree, and I might merge some other trees if they have important changes which I want before Linus takes them. When I did this the first time is btw the time where I really learned to appreciate just how powerful git is. //Peter From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Stuge Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:34:59 +0200 Subject: [ath9k-devel] [ 00/78] 3.3.2-stable review In-Reply-To: References: <20120413105746.10ffb120@stein> <20120413190819.9469.qmail@stuge.se> <20120416162710.GA24100@kroah.com> <20120416205856.GA22298@kroah.com> <20120416212718.GA22824@kroah.com> Message-ID: <20120416223459.18769.qmail@stuge.se> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org Felipe Contreras wrote: > With more people using Arch Linux and thus the latest "stable" > release, I'd say we might see an increase in these kinds of issues. You touch on an important point. Arch has it's own support channels, and after a few of these kinds of issues perhaps Arch will decide to push a different kernel to their users. None of the Arch users I know (though only a few) would have had a critical problem without wifi. What kernel to push to users is anyway a distribution problem, so if you must discuss then please discuss within the Arch community the pros and cons of the various available kernel trees. Maybe they will prefer another one than they currently do, after your reasoning. I personally don't care about what any distribution does; I just use Linus' tree, and I might merge some other trees if they have important changes which I want before Linus takes them. When I did this the first time is btw the time where I really learned to appreciate just how powerful git is. //Peter