On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 08:50:56AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Johannes Berg > <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-08-27 at 08:48 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 4:43 AM, Johannes Berg > >> <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > By requiring 2.6.25 we can get rid of quite a lot of backport work. > >> > 2.6.25 was released more than five years ago (April 2011) and wasn't > >> > a long-term kernel either, so there's little point in supporting it > >> > now. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> I'm fine with this, please feel free to send as patch form unless you > >> want me to just accept it as is, I'd test compile it before > >> integration into the public tree. > > > > I think it's ok, the [rfc] was more for the fact of removing it rather > > than the contents. > > OK I'll apply then, thanks. Applied and pushed. Luis
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
