Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262027AbVADVMh (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:12:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262034AbVADVJb (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:09:31 -0500 Received: from gprs215-69.eurotel.cz ([160.218.215.69]:8122 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261873AbVADVE6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:04:58 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 22:04:25 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Bill Davidsen Cc: Adrian Bunk , Diego Calleja , Willy Tarreau , wli@holomorphy.com, aebr@win.tue.nl, solt2@dns.toxicfilms.tv, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: starting with 2.7 Message-ID: <20050104210424.GA1619@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20050103134727.GA2980@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1933 Lines: 42 Hi! > > Yes, -mm gives a bit more testing coverage, but it doesn't seem to be > > enough for this vast amount of changes. > > I have to say that with a few minor exceptions the introduction of new > features hasn't created long term (more than a few days) of problems. And > we have had that in previous stable versions as well. New features > themselves may not be totally stable, but in most cases they don't break > existing features, or are fixed in bk1 or bk2. What worries me is removing > features deliberately, and I won't beat that dead horse again, I've said > my piece. > > The "few minor exceptions:" > > SCSI command filtering - while I totally support the idea (and always > have), I miss running cdrecord as a normal user. Multisession doesn't work > as a normal user (at least if you follow the man page) because only root > can use -msinfo. There's also some raw mode which got a permission denied, > don't remember as I was trying something not doing production stuff. > > APM vs. ACPI - shutdown doesn't reliably power down about half of the > machines I use, and all five laptops have working suspend and non-working > resume. APM seems to be pretty unsupported beyond "use ACPI for that." Go ahead and become APM maintainer... APM needs some care. Problem is that ACPI needs driver model changes, and those affect APM too. But noone is using APM these days, so when something breaks there, it takes long to discover. So even someone testing APM at regular (like every -rc and every -mm) basis would help... Pavel -- People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl! - 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/