From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 27 May 2002 06:32:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 27 May 2002 06:32:34 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:56213 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 27 May 2002 06:32:32 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 03:17:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20020527.031732.95158135.davem@redhat.com> To: szepe@pinerecords.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tcallawa@redhat.com, colin@gibbs.dhs.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, aurora-sparc-devel@linuxpower.org Subject: Re: 2.4 SRMMU bug revisited From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20020527092408.GD345@louise.pinerecords.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Tomas Szepe Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 11:24:08 +0200 I can't say I like these fixes much. How about contributing some time to figuring out what the problem is instead of complaining all the time? %99 of people with sparc32 problems are totally unwilling (or unable) to help fix the bugs themselves, they merely whine. It gets a bit old after a while (which for me amount to roughly 7 years).