From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261261AbVAHTAa (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Jan 2005 14:00:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261263AbVAHTA3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Jan 2005 14:00:29 -0500 Received: from darwin.snarc.org ([81.56.210.228]:38801 "EHLO darwin.snarc.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261261AbVAHTAZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Jan 2005 14:00:25 -0500 Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 20:00:22 +0100 To: Jon Smirl Cc: lkml Subject: Re: kernel versions on Linus bk tree Message-ID: <20050108190022.GB8915@snarc.org> References: <9e473391050108102355c9a714@mail.gmail.com> <20050108185440.GA8915@snarc.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050108185440.GA8915@snarc.org> X-Warning: Email may contain unsmilyfied humor and/or satire. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i From: Vincent Hanquez Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 07:54:40PM +0100, Vincent Hanquez wrote: > > The problem is that 2.6.10 was released on kernel.org without the four > > level change. But Linus bk which also has version 2.6.10 has the > > change. Is there some way around this problem? > > include/linux/version.h is generated by the Makefile. This file do not > come with the source. oops, I misread, just ignore the comment ;) sorry for the noise. -- Vincent Hanquez