From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 30 Jan 2002 13:23:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 30 Jan 2002 13:21:52 -0500 Received: from vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca ([136.159.55.21]:11426 "EHLO vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 30 Jan 2002 13:20:51 -0500 Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:20:36 -0700 Message-Id: <200201301820.g0UIKaC13539@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> From: Richard Gooch To: Alan Cox Cc: vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua, tao@acc.umu.se (David Weinehall), brand@jupiter.cs.uni-dortmund.de (Horst von Brand), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] KERN_INFO for devfs In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: <200201301804.g0UI4nQ13064@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox writes: > > I'd prefer if tree maintainers (that means you, Alan:-) don't apply > > devfs patches that didn't come from me. I've already posted a patch > > which cleans up *all* the remaining printk()'s. In fact, it's a pair > > of patches, one for 2.4.x and one for 2.5.x. That was yesterday. Today > > I'm still seeing this thread being beaten to death. > > I'll apply stuff to my tree that looks sane and see what happens, if I know > there is an active maintainer I'll also replace it with newer stuff from > the mainstream and I won't submit it on to Marcelo. > > So no worries, I'm not going to screw your patchsets to Marcelo up OK. Regards, Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca