Re: Oops: ptrace fix buggy

["Jörn Engel" <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>]

On Mon, 14 April 2003 15:19:27 -0600, James Bourne wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, Jörn Engel wrote:
> 
> > So basically, neither the existing EXTRAVERSION nor my new FIXLEVEL
> > are checked. Any code could potentially break with -ac1 to -ac2 or
> > with .1 to .2.
> > 
> > Did anyone experience such problems with -ac already? There are far
> > more changes in -ac than there are in your patch.
> 
> Which brings the point as to why use a new variable unless you are going to
> actually modify LINUX_VERSION_CODE with it.  It actually makes more sense to
> just use EXTRAVERSION for this then.
> 
> Now, using EXTRAVERSION = .2 wouldn't be unrealistic...

Good point. My two (weak) arguments for the new variable are:

- A fixes-only tree is imo different from any other patchset and
should be marked as such. 2.4.20.2 sounds more official than
2.4.20-jb2. Whether this should be underscored for the developers as
well - not sure.

- It makes things like 2.4.20.1-je1 easier. But then again, someone
will come up with 2.4.21-pre7-ac1-je2-something_else5-even_more.

Sound a little too weak for the extra variable. Could have been a sign
that I lost the patch.

Jörn

-- 
Anything that can go wrong, will.
-- Finagle's Law