[lkml]   [2005]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Giving developers clue how many testers verified certain kernel version
Lee Revell wrote:

>On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 20:07 -0500, Alejandro Bonilla wrote:
>>I will get flames for this, but my laptop boots faster and sometimes
>>responds faster in 2.4.27 than in 2.6.12. Sorry, but this is the fact
>>for me. IBM T42.
>Sorry dude, but there's just no way that any automated process can catch
I'm not looking for an automated process for this. But for all in
general, when moving from 2.6.11 to 2.6.12 or from any version to
another. (At least in the same kernel branch)

>You will have to provide a detailed bug report (with numbers) like
>everyone else so we can fix it. "Waiting for it to fix itself" is the
>WORST thing you can do.
I never do this, believe me, but I could if I don't really see a
problem. But there could really be one behind.

>If you find a regression vs. an earlier kernel, please assume that
>you're the ONLY one to notice it and respond accordingly.
OK, I will, but I first of all need to learn how to tell if benchmarks
are better or worse.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-07-23 05:19    [W:0.042 / U:8.548 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site