Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964840AbWEJHb1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 May 2006 03:31:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964843AbWEJHb0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 May 2006 03:31:26 -0400 Received: from linux01.gwdg.de ([134.76.13.21]:2792 "EHLO linux01.gwdg.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964840AbWEJHb0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 May 2006 03:31:26 -0400 Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 09:31:23 +0200 (MEST) From: Jan Engelhardt To: Joshua Hudson cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Stability of 2.6.17-rc3? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1111 Lines: 27 > Was hoping 2.6.17 would be out within one week, doesn't look like it > is going to happen. > My thesis defense is coming up, need to merge my patches against some kernel > (requiring 2.6.16.1 looks weird). > Surprisingly I'm in the same position ^_^ Basing my patches on 2.6.16 makes a lot of changes produce compiler warnings again (e.g. due to changed prototypes in ipt_* matches and targets). > On a machine that 2.6.16.1 runs bug-free, is it sane to assume > 2.6.17-rc3 will as well? > If it fails outright, I can revert, but if it is unstable I'm going to > have some problems. > (You would be surprised how long it took me to discover a mistake that > sys_rename(on any filesystem) -> deadlock with my custom patch). If it is a kernel problem, report it. If it is a problem of your patch, well, I suppose you need to fix it then. :/ Jan Engelhardt -- - 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/