Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272394AbTGYXvk (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:51:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272393AbTGYXvj (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:51:39 -0400 Received: from pc2-cwma1-4-cust86.swan.cable.ntl.com ([213.105.254.86]:50560 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272395AbTGYXvg (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:51:36 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.4 -> 2.2 differences? From: Alan Cox To: Bernd Eckenfels Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Message-Id: <1059177773.1204.22.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 26 Jul 2003 01:02:53 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 917 Lines: 22 On Sad, 2003-07-26 at 00:29, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > In article <20030725142434.GS32585@rdlg.net> you wrote: > > With all the SCO fun going on I have people asking me what functionality > > we would loose if we rolled from 2.4.21 kernel to the last known stable > > 2.2 kernel. > > it is easier to turn off SMP. > > BTW: what will happen if there is some SMP code from IBM in the kernel which > is owned by SCO? Isnt it a matter of days to remove that code? Does anybody > have to pay for past usage of the code? The core 2.2 SMP code is stuff I wrote. Caldera (aka SCO) even provided me the hardware and asked me to do it. The later table parser code is from Intel. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/