lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Note that other architectures have never been an issue for releasing new
> kernels, and that is _particularly_ true of architectures like parisc and
> mips that haven't even _tried_ to track development kernels. In fact, mips
> "anti-maintenance" has often actively discouraged people from even
> bothering to update mips code when adding new features.

Um.. hey! Just because we weren't trying to merge with you during 2.5
for a long time doesn't mean we weren't tracking development. Looking
at our CVS history, we've merged your tree into ours in:

2.5.26
2.5.32
2.5.41
2.5.43
2.5.44
2.5.45
2.5.46
2.5.47
2.5.50
2.5.51
2.5.53
2.5.54

Our outstanding diff vs your tree is about 200k gzipped and it's almost
all drivers. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any core changes
we still need. I don't think we're using any deprecated interfaces
(eg flush_page_to_ram, unlike m68k, mips, mips64, sparc32 & v850).

Of course, I don't consider having working PA-RISC in your tree to be
a prerequisite for release. I just object to being used as an example :-P

--
"It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or
victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies.
Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:0.029 / U:2.896 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site