> > Now for the bit people might not like, the FP exception isn't the only > > patch in there since I was already about to roll out a new kernel > > anyway with the following trond NFS server patch (for talking to OSX > > 10.3 and FreeBSD clients): > > > > http://www.fys.uio.no/~trondmy/src/Linux-2.4.x/2.4.23-rc1/linux-2.4.23-03-fix_osx.dif > > Can the list please give some opinions on whether this fix should be > added into the next .legacy kernel which I'm preparing? I'm assuming > that the patch has been fairly well tested by now. As always, there is a > fine line between adding functionality which could come with it more > bugs, and providing wanted fixes. We really really need to get this one > out of the door in the next week or so, I think, otherwise we are just > going to get left behind with the next round of inevitable fixes. Well I'm biased of course :-) Note that http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=125996 considers it to be an "enhancement" rather than a bug fix... This patch has already made it into 2.4.x (well at least 2.4.26 has it), judging by the lack of a version in Trond's later directories I'd guess it made it in some time ago. I'll be happy to keep adding that patch myself if it causes anyone to worry too much about QA issues. Talking of QA I'm in the process of installing a (hopefully fairly plain) RH9 box so that I can test the next set of FL kernel updates (and build RH9 binaries on RH9 if that will help at all). It would have finished by now but the first box I brought out of retirement had the PSU explode about 60% through the install... Hmm maybe only having 64M on this box is going to be a problem, I'll see if I can borrow a little more from somewhere... -- Jon -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
