From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S261639AbSJDN2H>; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 09:28:07 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S261666AbSJDN2G>; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 09:28:06 -0400
Received: from mailout02.sul.t-online.com ([194.25.134.17]:7626 "EHLO
	mailout02.sul.t-online.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S261639AbSJDN2G> convert rfc822-to-8bit; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 09:28:06 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
From: Marc-Christian Petersen <m.c.p@wolk-project.de>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: O(1) Scheduler from Ingo vs. O(1) Scheduler from Robert
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 15:33:19 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3
Organization: WOLK - Working Overloaded Linux Kernel
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Message-Id: <200210041531.51913.m.c.p@wolk-project.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi there,

say, can anyone explain me why $subject patches are so different?
What exactly are the important differences, what patch should we use?

-- 
Kind regards
        Marc-Christian Petersen

http://sourceforge.net/projects/wolk

PGP/GnuPG Key: 1024D/569DE2E3DB441A16
Fingerprint: 3469 0CF8 CA7E 0042 7824 080A 569D E2E3 DB44 1A16
Key available at www.keyserver.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred.