Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*linux\-2\.4\-xfs\-1\.0\.patch\s*$/: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Igor Pruchanskiy <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 17:41:13 -0700
I was wondering if anyone actually got this patch to work.... It keeps complaining about existing /tmp/null/Makefile and i end up with 3 makefiles Makefile Makefile~ Makefile.rej I am doing patch -p
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00110.html (7,574 bytes)

2. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 19:44:55 -0500
try patch -p1 < patchfile in /usr/src/linux (or whatever the top of your tree is) -Eric -- Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs sandeen@xxxxxxx SGI, Inc.
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00112.html (7,864 bytes)

3. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Igor Pruchanskiy <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 17:53:26 -0700
doh! my fault.... that worked, but now linux-2.4.4-xfsTEST.patch won't apply complaining about already patched files.... igor
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00114.html (8,791 bytes)

4. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 19:59:37 -0500
That's because 2.4.4-xfsTEST is not a released version, and is packaged differently. It contains all patched files, while the official, released patches are broken into "core linux" and "xfs filesyst
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00115.html (8,472 bytes)

5. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:47:44 -0500
Please be aware anything in the "testing" directory should be considered potentially broken. This patch has been removed at this point since the devel tree has been updated to 2.4.4
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00126.html (9,134 bytes)

6. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Igor Pruchanskiy <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 19:46:42 -0700
The funny thing is that either one of the patches applys cleanly on it's own. but as soon as you start adding a second patch it starts complaining..... igor
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00131.html (9,516 bytes)

7. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:48:47 -0500
Yes, that's expected. -- Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs sandeen@xxxxxxx SGI, Inc.
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00132.html (8,419 bytes)

8. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 23:11:04 -0500
I'm not sure what you are expecting of these patches but please take a moment to understand what a patch is for before blinding applying applying things. I will have to says thing are getting out of
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00133.html (9,131 bytes)

9. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Igor Pruchanskiy <igor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:48:51 -0700
What am i expecting from those patches? hm.. this is a good question.... Me, as well, as other users of 2.4.x, expecting XFS-Release-1.0 ^^^^^^^ Isn't it ? and i would assume that "vanilla 2.4.x" wou
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00135.html (10,971 bytes)

10. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 23:15:02 -0500
It's not a distribution issue, it's an issue of turn-around when new kernels come out. While 2.4.2 is a month old, 2.4.4 is currently what, 4 days old? Maybe 5? Kernel internals change, it's not nece
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg00137.html (9,606 bytes)

11. linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: rin@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 17:41:13 -0700
I was wondering if anyone actually got this patch to work.... It keeps complaining about existing /tmp/null/Makefile and i end up with 3 makefiles Makefile Makefile~ Makefile.rej I am doing patch -p
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01474.html (7,574 bytes)

12. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 19:44:55 -0500
try patch -p1 < patchfile in /usr/src/linux (or whatever the top of your tree is) -Eric -- Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs sandeen@xxxxxxx SGI, Inc.
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01476.html (7,864 bytes)

13. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 17:53:26 -0700
doh! my fault.... that worked, but now linux-2.4.4-xfsTEST.patch won't apply complaining about already patched files.... igor
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01478.html (8,791 bytes)

14. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 19:59:37 -0500
That's because 2.4.4-xfsTEST is not a released version, and is packaged differently. It contains all patched files, while the official, released patches are broken into "core linux" and "xfs filesyst
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01479.html (8,472 bytes)

15. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:47:44 -0500
Please be aware anything in the "testing" directory should be considered potentially broken. This patch has been removed at this point since the devel tree has been updated to 2.4.4
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01490.html (9,134 bytes)

16. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: een@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 19:46:42 -0700
The funny thing is that either one of the patches applys cleanly on it's own. but as soon as you start adding a second patch it starts complaining..... igor
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01495.html (9,516 bytes)

17. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 21:48:47 -0500
Yes, that's expected. -- Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs sandeen@xxxxxxx SGI, Inc.
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01496.html (8,419 bytes)

18. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: een@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 23:11:04 -0500
I'm not sure what you are expecting of these patches but please take a moment to understand what a patch is for before blinding applying applying things. I will have to says thing are getting out of
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01497.html (9,131 bytes)

19. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 20:48:51 -0700
What am i expecting from those patches? hm.. this is a good question.... Me, as well, as other users of 2.4.x, expecting XFS-Release-1.0 ^^^^^^^ Isn't it ? and i would assume that "vanilla 2.4.x" wou
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01499.html (10,971 bytes)

20. Re: linux-2.4-xfs-1.0.patch (score: 1)
Author: a@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 23:15:02 -0500
It's not a distribution issue, it's an issue of turn-around when new kernels come out. While 2.4.2 is a month old, 2.4.4 is currently what, 4 days old? Maybe 5? Kernel internals change, it's not nece
/archives/xfs/2001-05/msg01501.html (9,606 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu