No problems seen here on my P4 3 GHZ Intel-based PC. Many thanks Dave et al for your hard work on getting this done. I really appreciate it!

On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 08:37:44AM -0800, Akemi Yagi wrote: > I presume you are referring to 2.6.19-1.2287.fc5. No such good luck > for those of us suffering from the cifs bug. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211672 > > The patch was made available about 2-3 weeks ago, but did not make it > into this kernel. I suppose it will take some more time for the fix to > be incorporated in Fedora kernels. The .19 for FC5 was something of a rush, as we wanted to get it on the same level as FC6 again. (The rebase also served as a great learning experience for Chuck, the new Fedora kernel co-maintainer). Next week we'll be moving both FC5 and FC6 to 2.6.20, which should include the fix referenced above. Dave

Dave Jones wrote: > On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 08:37:44AM -0800, Akemi Yagi wrote: > > On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 00:12:55 -0600, Gilbert Sebenste wrote: > > > > > No problems seen here on my P4 3 GHZ Intel-based PC. Many thanks Dave et > > > al for your hard work on getting this done. I really appreciate it! > > > > I presume you are referring to 2.6.19-1.2287.fc5. No such good luck for > > those of us suffering from the cifs bug. > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211672 > > > > The patch was made available about 2-3 weeks ago, but did not make it into > > this kernel. I suppose it will take some more time for the fix to be > > incorporated in Fedora kernels. > > The .19 for FC5 was something of a rush, as we wanted to get it > on the same level as FC6 again. (The rebase also served as a great > learning experience for Chuck, the new Fedora kernel co-maintainer). > Next week we'll be moving both FC5 and FC6 to 2.6.20, which should > include the fix referenced above. > does this mean that the xen rebase is complete? good news ;)

Dave Jones wrote: > No. I think that's still likely at least two weeks off. > What we're thinking of doing is pushing out just the non-xen kernels > first, with the xen kernels to follow when they're ready. > It's not a perfect situation, but this way at least means that > people who aren't using xen are held up by the rebase. > > ok, is there a .20 based kernel to test now?