linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 649 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree produced a mountain of
conflicts so I have used the version from next-20100512 for today.
Please either merge Linus' tree into yours or rebase you tree on top of
Linus' tree.  There are a large number of commits that are in your tree
that have been rebased before being included into Linus' tree and this
caused conflicts with further changes in your tree.

Please consider changing your work flow so that you don't rebase things
in your tree before sending them to Linus.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Mauro,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree produced a mountain of
> conflicts so I have used the version from next-20100512 for today.
> Please either merge Linus' tree into yours or rebase you tree on top of
> Linus' tree.  There are a large number of commits that are in your tree
> that have been rebased before being included into Linus' tree and this
> caused conflicts with further changes in your tree.

I'll be pulling from Linus on my tree. I did it yesterday, after my last changes,
but it seems that I've made a huge mistake... Several conflicts that I've already
fixed reappeared. I suspect that I've merged it with an older temporary branch
by mistake.

Anyway, it is fixed, by simply going back to the last reflog before the error,
and re-merging the new patches again. A pull from Linus didn't show any conflict.

So, it should be now OK for you to merge.

> Please consider changing your work flow so that you don't rebase things
> in your tree before sending them to Linus.

I'm already in process of changing my procedure. The problem is that I didn't find
yet a perfect way to handle my tree. I'm getting some new ideas, and intend to implement
them for 2.6.35 development cycle (linux-next for 2.6.36).

-- 

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1174 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Thu, 13 May 2010 02:18:33 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> I'll be pulling from Linus on my tree. I did it yesterday, after my last changes,
> but it seems that I've made a huge mistake... Several conflicts that I've already
> fixed reappeared. I suspect that I've merged it with an older temporary branch
> by mistake.

That explains it.

> Anyway, it is fixed, by simply going back to the last reflog before the error,
> and re-merging the new patches again. A pull from Linus didn't show any conflict.
> 
> So, it should be now OK for you to merge.

Excellent, thanks.

> > Please consider changing your work flow so that you don't rebase things
> > in your tree before sending them to Linus.
> 
> I'm already in process of changing my procedure. The problem is that I didn't find
> yet a perfect way to handle my tree. I'm getting some new ideas, and intend to implement
> them for 2.6.35 development cycle (linux-next for 2.6.36).

OK, good.  The process doesn't have to be perfect ... ;-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1656 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 09:48:27 -0200 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> Now, everything is simpler and I hope it will work like a charm.

Excellent, here's hoping.

> I've just updated today my linux-next tree. I'm now using branch "master" for
> V4L/DVB patches. "stable" is now just a copy of your "stable" branch.

OK, understood.

> I have one doubt about what would work better for you: should I merge also the
> patches for the current kernel version, that I intend to send upstream, or it
> would be better to just have there the newer patches for the next version?

You can either do that merge, or I can fetch a second tree from you (as I
do from several others) that just contains commits for the current
release i.e. usually just fixes. (see e.g. powerpc-merge,
driver-core.current and the other current trees).  I merge these early
after stating from Linus' tree.  The thinking is that these trees are
usually small or empty, but they mean that I don't have to worry about
bugs in Linus' tree that have already been fixed but the fixes haven't
been merged by Linus yet.

If you also merge that fixes tree into your next tree (to fix conflicts)
then that is OK as well (and is sometimes better/easier than merging the
whole of Linus' current tree).

> Anyway, please start pushing from 
                       ^^^^^^^
fetching :-)

>  ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mchehab/linux-next.git master

OK, starting tomorrow.

Thanks for sorting this out.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Hi Stephen,

On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:16:32 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Mauro,
> 
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 18:28:46 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a lot of conflicts
> > against Linus' tree.  It looks like it has been rebased and has
> > cherry-picked a lot of commits from Linus' tree.  However it got into
> > this state, it needs a major fixup.
> > 
> > I have dropped it for today.
> 
> And continue to do so.  Please clean it up.
> 
> (Just as a reminder, I fetch your "stable" branch.)

I've changed my git procedures on 2.6.27 to avoid having to rebase my tree, but
this works really badly, generating lots of rework for me. So, I had to alter
my procedures again for 2.6.28.

Now, everything is simpler and I hope it will work like a charm.

I've finished those procedures yesterday by preparing my first set of patches
after the end of the merge window, with an independent tree with patches that
aren't just fixes (in the past, this were a branch at the same tree, but this
weren't work fine).

I've just updated today my linux-next tree. I'm now using branch "master" for
V4L/DVB patches. "stable" is now just a copy of your "stable" branch.

I have one doubt about what would work better for you: should I merge also the
patches for the current kernel version, that I intend to send upstream, or it
would be better to just have there the newer patches for the next version?

Anyway, please start pushing from 
 ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mchehab/linux-next.git master

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 596 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 18:28:46 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a lot of conflicts
> against Linus' tree.  It looks like it has been rebased and has
> cherry-picked a lot of commits from Linus' tree.  However it got into
> this state, it needs a major fixup.
> 
> I have dropped it for today.

And continue to do so.  Please clean it up.

(Just as a reminder, I fetch your "stable" branch.)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 394 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a lot of conflicts
against Linus' tree.  It looks like it has been rebased and has
cheery-picked a lot of commits from Linus' tree.  However it got into
this state, it needs a major fixup.

I have dropped it for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 13:42:39 +1000
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Mauro,
> 
> On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 13:14:58 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/media/radio/dsbr100.c between commit
> > 59d1f04f76c8386d468f74c18fe5c008752c9340 ("USB: remove warn() macro from
> > usb.h") from the usb tree and commit
> > 63057954eb49549963c4c5079381492575cab33a ("V4L/DVB (8778): radio: fix
> > incorrect video_register_device result check") from the v4l-dvb tree.
> > 
> > Just a context clash.  I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix.
> 
> Of course, this is fixable in the v4l-dvb tree as well.

Hi Stephen,

Thanks for warning me. Unfortunately, I got some issues on my current procedure
of handling my tree. The old procedure of using stacked git were much better
from my side, but were leading to a few inconsistencies. I'm still trying to
find a way to allow me to merge my patches without generating merge noise on
upstream tree and without needing to rebase every time a patch is merged
upstream.

I'm trying to give a definitive solution to fix it. Due to
that, I had to rebase my tree (in fact, I've re-created it). So, this conflict
will likely rise on today's (and probably on tomorrow's merge), since I'm
currently focused on fixing my tree to send a long list of pending stuff
upstream.

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 721 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 13:14:58 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a conflict in
> drivers/media/radio/dsbr100.c between commit
> 59d1f04f76c8386d468f74c18fe5c008752c9340 ("USB: remove warn() macro from
> usb.h") from the usb tree and commit
> 63057954eb49549963c4c5079381492575cab33a ("V4L/DVB (8778): radio: fix
> incorrect video_register_device result check") from the v4l-dvb tree.
> 
> Just a context clash.  I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix.

Of course, this is fixable in the v4l-dvb tree as well.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a conflict in
drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c between commit
4f1ddb5e3580439b0168e1ad14b8328ec926768f ("USB: remove info() macro from
usb.h") from the usb tree and commit
1527ad8b9b0ecacb5d06c309e26a688359ef2919 ("V4L/DVB (8731): zr364xx:
remove BKL") from the v4l-dvb tree.

Just overlapping context.  I have fixed it up (see below) and can carry
the fix.  This is, of course, also fixable in the v4l-dvb tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

diff --cc drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c
index 5eb8cb8,93991cb..0000000
--- a/drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c
+++ b/drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c
@@@ -651,8 -652,9 +653,9 @@@ static int zr364xx_open(struct inode *i
  	if (!cam->framebuf) {
  		cam->framebuf = vmalloc_32(MAX_FRAME_SIZE * FRAMES);
  		if (!cam->framebuf) {
 -			info("vmalloc_32 failed!");
 +			dev_err(&cam->udev->dev, "vmalloc_32 failed!\n");
- 			return -ENOMEM;
+ 			err = -ENOMEM;
+ 			goto out;
  		}
  	}
  
@@@ -663,10 -664,8 +665,9 @@@
  				     0, init[cam->method][i].bytes,
  				     init[cam->method][i].size);
  		if (err < 0) {
 -			info("error during open sequence: %d", i);
 +			dev_err(&cam->udev->dev,
 +				"error during open sequence: %d\n", i);
- 			mutex_unlock(&cam->lock);
- 			return err;
+ 			goto out;
  		}
  	}
  
@@@ -705,9 -712,8 +714,8 @@@ static int zr364xx_release(struct inod
  				     0, init[i][cam->method].bytes,
  				     init[cam->method][i].size);
  		if (err < 0) {
 -			info("error during release sequence");
 +			dev_err(&udev->dev, "error during release sequence\n");
- 			mutex_unlock(&cam->lock);
- 			return err;
+ 			goto out;
  		}
  	}
  

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a conflict in
drivers/media/radio/dsbr100.c between commit
59d1f04f76c8386d468f74c18fe5c008752c9340 ("USB: remove warn() macro from
usb.h") from the usb tree and commit
63057954eb49549963c4c5079381492575cab33a ("V4L/DVB (8778): radio: fix
incorrect video_register_device result check") from the v4l-dvb tree.

Just a context clash.  I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

diff --cc drivers/media/radio/dsbr100.c
index d8e3857,0f06e6f..0000000
--- a/drivers/media/radio/dsbr100.c
+++ b/drivers/media/radio/dsbr100.c
@@@ -413,9 -412,9 +414,10 @@@ static int usb_dsbr100_open(struct inod
  	radio->muted = 1;
  
  	if (dsbr100_start(radio)<0) {
 -		warn("Radio did not start up properly");
 +		dev_warn(&radio->usbdev->dev,
 +			 "Radio did not start up properly\n");
  		radio->users = 0;
+ 		unlock_kernel();
  		return -EIO;
  	}
  	dsbr100_setfreq(radio, radio->curfreq);
@@@ -496,8 -496,8 +499,8 @@@ static int usb_dsbr100_probe(struct usb
  	radio->usbdev = interface_to_usbdev(intf);
  	radio->curfreq = FREQ_MIN*FREQ_MUL;
  	video_set_drvdata(radio->videodev, radio);
- 	if (video_register_device(radio->videodev, VFL_TYPE_RADIO,radio_nr)) {
+ 	if (video_register_device(radio->videodev, VFL_TYPE_RADIO, radio_nr) < 0) {
 -		warn("Could not register video device");
 +		dev_warn(&intf->dev, "Could not register video device\n");
  		video_device_release(radio->videodev);
  		kfree(radio->transfer_buffer);
  		kfree(radio);

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 02:11:13PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Mauro,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a conflict in
> drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c between commit
> 8aac48f4f2460b00468fd5f1101addf3df04e94c ("USB: remove info() macro from
> usb.h") from the usb tree and commit
> dcdbac23cc15325ae04696803537b35bb0bcb3cb ("V4L/DVB (8613): v4l: move BKL
> down to the driver level") from the v4l-dvb tree.
> 
> A context clashing change and addition.  I fixed it up (see below) and
> can carry it.

Looks fine to me, thanks for doing this.

greg k-h

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Hans Verkuil]

On Tuesday 19 August 2008 06:11:13 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Mauro,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a conflict in
> drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c between commit
> 8aac48f4f2460b00468fd5f1101addf3df04e94c ("USB: remove info() macro
> from usb.h") from the usb tree and commit
> dcdbac23cc15325ae04696803537b35bb0bcb3cb ("V4L/DVB (8613): v4l: move
> BKL down to the driver level") from the v4l-dvb tree.
>
> A context clashing change and addition.  I fixed it up (see below)
> and can carry it.

Signed-off-by: Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xs4al.nl>

Thanks!

	Hans

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a conflict in
drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c between commit
8aac48f4f2460b00468fd5f1101addf3df04e94c ("USB: remove info() macro from
usb.h") from the usb tree and commit
dcdbac23cc15325ae04696803537b35bb0bcb3cb ("V4L/DVB (8613): v4l: move BKL
down to the driver level") from the v4l-dvb tree.

A context clashing change and addition.  I fixed it up (see below) and
can carry it.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

diff --cc drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c
index 5eb8cb8,4e1ef10..0000000
--- a/drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c
+++ b/drivers/media/video/zr364xx.c
@@@ -651,7 -653,8 +654,8 @@@ static int zr364xx_open(struct inode *i
  	if (!cam->framebuf) {
  		cam->framebuf = vmalloc_32(MAX_FRAME_SIZE * FRAMES);
  		if (!cam->framebuf) {
 -			info("vmalloc_32 failed!");
 +			dev_err(&cam->udev->dev, "vmalloc_32 failed!\n");
+ 			unlock_kernel();
  			return -ENOMEM;
  		}
  	}
@@@ -663,9 -666,9 +667,10 @@@
  				     0, init[cam->method][i].bytes,
  				     init[cam->method][i].size);
  		if (err < 0) {
 -			info("error during open sequence: %d", i);
 +			dev_err(&cam->udev->dev,
 +				"error during open sequence: %d\n", i);
  			mutex_unlock(&cam->lock);
+ 			unlock_kernel();
  			return err;
  		}
  	}

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 582 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got conflicts in 51 files
against Linus' tree.  It looks like a slightly modified version of the
tree was merged to Linus.  Please don't do that - or at least update what
is in linux-next to match.  But preferably, ask Linus to take what has
already been tested in linux-next.  You can add fixups after that if
necessary.

I just dropped the linux-next version of the tree for today. Please fix
it all up.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 554 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a conflict in
drivers/media/video/Kconfig between commit
c0efd232929c2cd87238de2cccdaf4e845be5b0c ("V4L/DVB (8145a): USB Video
Class driver") from Linus' tree (which is also in the v4l-dvb tree) and
commit 2f70db892654f1e3c65c527e00a8982166142020 ("V4L/DVB (8152): Initial
release of gspca with only one driver") from the v4l-dvb tree.

Just a case of overlapping additions.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:56:45 +1000
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Mauro,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a trivial conflict in
> drivers/media/video/videodev.c between commit
> 7fa8e6fa1519194fc0c931f40d530fb55137bad9 ("V4L/DVB (8092): videodev:
> simplify and fix standard enumeration") from Linus' tree (which is also
> in the v4l-dvb tree) and commit 561216cf5e422669b4f9e54a6157d731245feecc
> ("V4L/DVB (8103): videodev: fix/improve ioctl debugging") from the
> v4l-dvb tree.
> 
> Again, I fixed it up and will carry it.

Thanks. I'll rebase my tree.

>  But also my comments about a bug
> fix branch/tree apply here also.
> 
Hmm... I have here two branches, one with bug fixes only and another with bug fixes
+ improvements. The last one is exported into my linux-next tree. Having just
improvements on it seems a good idea, except that, sometimes, an improvement
requires first that some bug fix patch to be applied first. Anyway, I'm seeking
for some time to change my upstream procedures to get rid of those issues.

Cheers,
Mauro

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 652 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a trivial conflict in
drivers/media/video/videodev.c between commit
7fa8e6fa1519194fc0c931f40d530fb55137bad9 ("V4L/DVB (8092): videodev:
simplify and fix standard enumeration") from Linus' tree (which is also
in the v4l-dvb tree) and commit 561216cf5e422669b4f9e54a6157d731245feecc
("V4L/DVB (8103): videodev: fix/improve ioctl debugging") from the
v4l-dvb tree.

Again, I fixed it up and will carry it.  But also my comments about a bug
fix branch/tree apply here also.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 586 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a trivial conflict in
drivers/media/video/em28xx/em28xx-cards.c between commit
b38cc642000f0a262db367ffb95cd02ca2ead59b (V4L/DVB (8011): em28xx: enable
DVB for HVR-900"") from Linus' tree (which also exists in the dvb-v4l
tree) and commit bcb323c2fc5555307589386bffc58abd2a397661 ("V4L/DVB
(8006): em28xx: Split HVR900 into two separate entries") from the v4l-dvb
tree.

Same comments as the other conflict.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1200 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree got a trivial conflict in
drivers/media/video/cx18/cx18-cards.h between commit
1f09e8a25c9aaa4066b4593c1bf99a4cbcc38120 ("V4L/DVB (8068): cx18: Add I2C
slave reset via GPIO upon initialization") from Linus' tree (which also
appears in the  v4l-dvb tree and commit
a03a7daf6fe02d87a1919e1dc6c156c8ea46134b ("V4L/DVB (8089): cx18: add
support for Conexant Raptor PAL/SECAM card") from the v4l-dvb tree.

I just fixed it up and will carry it. If you rebase your tree on
Linus' (or merge Linus' tree into yours) this should go away.

You should consider running a separate branch for bug fixes that are fed
to Linus during the -rc series as that would isolate these conflicts
somewhat (and it would test those bug fixes in isolation).  You can then
merge that branch into your "stable" branch (which is for the next merge
window) whenever there may be conflicts and fix those conflicts
yourself.  I would also carry this bug fix tree/branch and merge it
earlier (it would mostly be empty as Linus would be merging it).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]