![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 22/03/2008, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote: > From: "Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> > Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 01:10:40 +0100 > > > > As I see it, this patch is quite trivial and does not fix any "real problem". > > How come this is suitable for -stable? > > > > I have no objections to the patch "as such", I just don't think it > > makes sense for -stable. > > > It makes a difference for driver maintainers when users > report bugs and we ask them for the version printed > by the driver so that we know which fixes have been > applied. > Ok, fair enough. > You know, if people are going to be jerky about this, > I'll just include the version bump in the actual bug > fixes which I sometimes do anyways. > > Thanks for bringing this up, it's a useful use of > everyone's time :-/ > Excuse me for reading patches, trying to spot problems and thinking about where they are applied and what rules apply etc. -- Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2008-03-22 01:19 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||