On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Tobias Powalowski <t.powa@xxxxxx> wrote: > Am Sonntag 24 April 2011 schrieb Emmanuel Benisty: >> Hi, >> >> I was having some sound issue with ARCH 2.6.38.3 stock kernel so I >> started to bisect it from Greg KH's 2.6.38.y stable tree. >> .38.2 was good and .38.3 was bad (so I thought) but I hadn't any >> single bad commit during bisecting. However, .38.4 /was/ bad. I could >> finally find the guilty commit (which is in .38.4) but couldn't >> understand why I was hit by this issue even with 2.6.38.3-ARCH. Then I >> diff'd both .38.3 patches and found out that Arch's one includes >> patches that are not in Greg's release. It seems we include patches >> that are still in -stable patch queue. >> Finally, I just have one question: is that normal? All I can say is >> that it made my bisecting session a real PITA. Please give me back my >> CPU cycles :P >> >> Cheers. >> -- Emmanuel > The .3 contained some prepatches from the stable queue. > That is the explanation for it. Thanks Tobias but I already learned that the hard way :P Should we really do that? Or in that case, shouldn't the package be given another version? That is really confusing. Furthermore, those patches are still being tested in a way. Here's what Greg KH says in the announcement: "If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let us know." That is before the .y release...
