From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 28 May 2002 12:12:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 28 May 2002 12:12:53 -0400 Received: from nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com ([66.187.233.200]:26993 "EHLO devserv.devel.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 28 May 2002 12:12:52 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 12:12:53 -0400 From: Pete Zaitcev Message-Id: <200205281612.g4SGCr821003@devserv.devel.redhat.com> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4 SRMMU bug revisited In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> The BK repository to use has the URL: >> >> bk://linux.bkbits.net/linux-2.4 >> >> The web stuff is updated still by hand and is as a result chronically >> out of date. > > Which is a concern since both Linus and Larry made it clear bitkeeper > would *NEVER* be required of contributors. Is there nothing generating > nightly tarballs off cron right now ? It is still not required, in theory. A developer may elect to wait until the change recycles all the way to Linus, then receive it with regular kernels. This is what I do -- tired of BK... Also, I am too stupid to understand the concept of changeset. -- Pete