Rik van Riel wrote: > On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Zachary Amsden wrote: > > >> There is a Signed-off-by line on every patch I send out, >> > > You're right. It was just the first 1/24 that was missing it, > it was there in the second copy. > BTW, I have no idea why the first 1/24 was missing it. I checked right before sending, and it was there - perhaps I forgot to save my changes. The second copy turned out fine, but didn't make it to LKML. Everyone cc'd directly got it, but the LKML filter has a ban on the word propasition, and being blackholed by it, I merely assumed the patch was too large - so I split it up, and actually ended up binary searching down to the problematic section before finding the taboo list. _Every_ problem eventually turns into a binary search. Zach
