[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] platform/x86: Fix recursive Kconfig dependency
    On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Peter Hüwe <> wrote:
    > Am Freitag 17 Dezember 2010, 12:30:15 schrieb Sedat Dilek:
    >> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Peter Hüwe <> wrote:
    >> > Am Mittwoch 15 Dezember 2010, 21:51:04 schrieb Randy Dunlap:
    >> >> > Hi, another patch was posted before:
    >> >> >
    >> >> >
    >> >> > tch =acpi_wmi
    >> >> >Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <>
    >> >
    >> > Yeah, you're right - but as Sedat's patch is perfect (and fixes both) -
    >> > so for Sedats's patch:
    >> > Acked-by: Peter Huewe <>
    >> >
    >> > Thanks,
    >> > Peter
    >> [ CC John Linville ]
    >> It's a bit disappointing to see my fix is still not in
    >> platform-drivers-x86/linux-next [1] (even it's only fixing "warnings",
    >> 9 days past).
    >> linux-next tree is for me a very high dynamic SCM tree, I am doing
    >> mostly daily builds, at weekend I am testing/pulling other trees
    >> before they go into Monday's linux-next.
    >> As far as I have fun with "my process"... I will continue.
    > Added Stephen Rothwell on CC, maybe he can apply it directly to linux-next ;)
    > Peter

    I do not think this will happen for a "as-warning-classified" patch.
    As far as I understood from a previous asking to accept a patch
    through Stephen, he answered me that he is expecting that patches for
    sub-trees shall be pushed by the sub-maintainer(s).
    This is surely the optimal way.

    There is a nice, informative interview with Stephen on topic of
    linux-next [1] (working together with submaintainers etc.).

    Unfortunately, it will sometimes happen that more than one people will
    notice or send a patch to the same issue.
    So, yeah a bit waste of time someone could think.
    Thus, it is always good to check the MLs first :-).

    But which MLs?
    It's a pity people don't use linux-next ML for l-n releated stuff.
    As a consequence, I subscribed a few hours ago to linux-next ML [2]
    and will post primarily there (LKML should IMHO not be the 1st place
    for such issues, but a CC is OK).

    The subjects of Emails should be very clear on what type of issue.
    For example, breakage(s) shoul be clearly expressed.
    Also, I miss often against WTF version of linux-next ppl send patches.
    Hey, hello, each l-n version has a localversion-next file, didn't see :-)?
    A good subject:
    "Re: linux-next: Tree for December 20 (BROKEN iwlwifi)" or
    "linux-next: next-20101220 (BROKEN iwlwifi)"

    That a GIT tree is compile-able is a (maybe *the*) first step to QA,
    but QA is a big playground.

    Hmm, I have some ideas in my big suitcase...
    The wiki [1] needs partly a refresh...
    An IRC-channel #linux-next would be fine...
    Lemme re-think and write them down.

    - Sedat -

    P.S.: Personally, I have seen some patches from Randy and others which
    were still not applied.

    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: 2010-12-20 15:49    [W:0.025 / U:24.568 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site