On Sun, 2003-07-27 at 18:24, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On 27 Jul 2003, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> >
> > Indeed, linux-kernel is too much for me to handle. I did post these
> > changes long before committing them and would have appreciated feedback
> > though, but sadly received none.
>
> Hmm.. I follow
On Sun, 2003-07-27 at 09:24, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On 27 Jul 2003, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> >
> > Indeed, linux-kernel is too much for me to handle. I did post these
> > changes long before committing them and would have appreciated feedback
> > though, but sadly received none.
>
> Hmm.. I follow
On 27 Jul 2003, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
> Indeed, linux-kernel is too much for me to handle. I did post these
> changes long before committing them and would have appreciated feedback
> though, but sadly received none.
Hmm.. I follow dri-devel, but I didn't see any patches. I assume there is
a s
On Sun, 2003-07-27 at 02:40, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Ok, I just updated to the current CVS head to check what's up and keep the
> kernel in sync, and I have to say that that kernel stuff is getting uglier
> and uglier. That macro abuse is getting quite _incredibly_ horrible.
>
> For example, the
Ok, I just updated to the current CVS head to check what's up and keep the
kernel in sync, and I have to say that that kernel stuff is getting uglier
and uglier. That macro abuse is getting quite _incredibly_ horrible.
For example, the "irqreturn_t" differences between Linux 2.4 and 2.6 were
ve
