From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:03:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:03:27 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:18304 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:03:14 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:02:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20010816.160208.55508845.davem@redhat.com> To: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Cc: tpepper@vato.org, f5ibh@db0bm.ampr.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.9 does not compile [PATCH] From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Mew version 2.0 on Emacs 21.0 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Alan Cox Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 23:55:44 +0100 (BST) > 2) You were CC:'d on every single email > that Linus and I had on these changes, and you > saw every single revision of the patch. Yep. And at the time I asked you to send it to the maintainers and the like. When you were shown the patch your sentiments were: 1) Some of that stuff is against old drivers, I have newer ones in -ac so no biggie. 2) The ixj instances look like real bugs, and that you'd have a closer look. 3) If there are any merge issues in your -ac tree, no big deal because they'd show up as obvious compile errors. 4) Otherwise, it looked just fine to you. I don't recall you saying anything about "make sure to tell the maintainers" But, on the other hand, I can't prove that you didn't (I don't keep detailed mail logs anymore except for what I send out myself), so if you did I apologize. Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com