On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 07:21:46PM -0600, Jim Cromie wrote: > Rik van Riel wrote: > >Jim Cromie wrote: >... > >>24-ac > >> major product of this tree was VM that went into 2.4.10 > > > oops. I meant -aa there. > > iirc, there was some hullabaloo about how that VM got in, > directly by Linus, w/o the usual review. > I planned to leave that 'gossip-column' talk out, > but there is some 'motivation for process' there .. ;-) AFAIR the problem wasn't a lack of review, the problem was that some people including Alan considered it too much of a change for the stable 2.4 series. I even remember Linus stating much later that Alan was right... > While we're talking 'dirty laundry', what was the day-Zero defect > in 2.4.11 that caused it to be marked -dontuse in the archive ? > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/ >... http://lkml.org/lkml/2001/10/11/23 cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel. Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/ FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/
