kernel oops in cfi_cmdset_0002.c:do_write_one()...
tglx at linutronix.de
Thu Apr 8 15:28:23 EDT 2004
On Thursday 08 April 2004 16:37, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Thu, 8 April 2004 15:29:09 +0200, Steven Scholz wrote:
> > I just notice that in my old 2.4.20 kernel tree I have a
> > * $Id: cfi_cmdset_0002.c,v 1.67 2003/04/15 22:32:13 thayne Exp $
> > and in a _new_ 2.4.25 tree I have
> > * $Id: cfi_cmdset_0002.c,v 1.62 2003/01/24 23:30:13 dwmw2 Exp $
> > How could that be !?!?
> > Is the MTD code not pushed up into the main kernel sources???
> It is, whenever David finds the time for it.
> Don't blame him, this is the result of using CVS, which is designed
> around the assumption of a single central repository. If current sync
> speed is to slow for you, try to make it easier for him to send
> patches forward.
I don't know, if he is really happy, if everybody starts to send patches
upstream. He does a good job on this and he focussed more on 2.6 in the last
months. But I'm sure that he can be convinced to bring 2.4 to the same state
as 2.6 at least. On the other hand we live very well with the MTD patches
since long, so what :) I never trust the kernel stuff of subsystems, which
have a active development team :)
"Free software" is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept,
you should think of "free" as in "free speech,'' not as in "free beer".
linutronix - competence in embedded & realtime linux
mail: tglx at linutronix.de
More information about the linux-mtd