Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote: > Was this an intentional overload of 139 (and so on for other archs)? Just > checking - I'm sure if it goes in like this, we'll see a patch to "fix" the > collision for 3.16.0 or so... ;) Ummm... Odd... I'm surprised StGIT managed to reapply my patches with no warning. I'll fix the numbering in them. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
