Hi Ingo, On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 10:14:56 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > this has been fixed already a few days ago (if you google for the build > failure string it will send you straight to the fix patch) - i just didnt > push it out to the -next branches yet during the hollidays. (did that now) Thanks. > Generally if you see a problem with our trees you can check whether an > issue is still present in tip/master: > > http://people.redhat.com/mingo/tip.git/README I'll try to remember ... [I wish you had stopped there] > before duplicating fixing effort and reporting it as a genuine issue - It broke a linux-next build - just how genuine does an issue have to be? Even if I knew you had already fixed it, I would still have reported it (although saying where I got the fix from) so that others know why I have had to apply a patch. > especially in a busy timeframe like the merge window when the _next_ merge > window is the least of our worries. During the merge window, linux-next is not concerned with the _next_ merge window (as my previous reminder to people spelt out), but very much with the current merge window. What you don't seem to realise is that others use linux-next during the merge window to do integration testing after fixing up their trees to cope with stuff that Linus has already merged (in order - as much as possible - to not break Linus' tree). So when you break the linux-next tree, you make life harder for them. So, how much of your time would have been "wasted" remembering to put that fix into the linux-next branch compared to my time and the time of others? And don't bother responding (especially privately) I don't need the aggravation. If you feel a need to reply coming on, just delete this email instead and pretend I didn't write it. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Attachment:
pgpFIfiUWePgz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
