> Which tree are you looking at? to-linus-2.5 or linux-ia64-2.5? I have > gotten quite lazy in pushing the former, since the only reason now to > do a push there is when I want Linus to do a pull. The latter tree is > much more active. The latter (linux-ia64-2.5). But ... argh! I've been doing "bk changes -R" to watch for your updates, and saw none. BUT, I just did a "bk pull" and got a lot of them. OK, ignore my questions about ptrace.c and setup.c. Questions still open: arch/ia64/kernel/signal.c: restore_sigcontext() changes look equivalent, but have gratuitous differences from 2.5 (reversed sense of test, comment) arch/ia64/kernel/traps.c: Gratuitous whitespace differences. include/asm-ia64/processor.h: ia64_is_local_fpu_owner(), ia64_set_local_fpu_owner(): these look functionally equivalent in 2.4 and 2.5. Can they be made identical? include/asm-ia64/system.h: IA64_HAS_EXTRA_STATE() and switch_to() appear to be identical in 2.4 and 2.5 except for whitespace changes. Can they be made identical? BjornReceived on Wed May 28 21:25:47 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:15 EST