From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262153AbTIAE1j (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2003 00:27:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262263AbTIAE1j (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2003 00:27:39 -0400 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]:17832 "EHLO rwcrmhc11.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262153AbTIAE1i (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2003 00:27:38 -0400 Subject: bitkeeper comments From: Albert Cahalan To: linux-kernel mailing list Cc: Linus Torvalds , ak@suse.de, lm@bitmover.com Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1062389729.314.31.camel@cube> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4 Date: 01 Sep 2003 00:15:30 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This just got into BitKeeper, about 10 hours ago: > [PATCH] x86-64 update > > Make everything compile and boot again. > > The earlier third party ioport.c changes unfortunately > didn't even compile, fix that too. > > - Update defconfig > - Some minor cleanup > - Introduce physid_t for APIC masks (fixes UP kernels) > - Finish ioport.c merge and fix compilation Several days ago, I mailed Andi Kleen a build log which showed that ioport.c builds perfectly well on x86-64. The whole 2.6.0-test4 kernel does in fact, as downloaded from kernel.org. Andi Kleen agreed... ...and now this comment gets submitted to Linus, ending up in BitKeeper. I'd like this changed. I realize that it may be a rather difficult thing to change at this point, but it is clearly wrong.