[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20071025165358.c408314d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:53:58 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: tytso@....edu, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 update
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:44:21 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > There shouldn't have been conflicts here - if there were I wouldn't have
> > sent those patches. Unless there were things in the ext4 pull which
> > weren't present in the ext4 quilt tree which I included in 2.6.23-mm1?
>
> Well, you merge your patch-series by patching.
>
> You should have noticed by now that GNU patch in particular will happily
> apply a patch whether it conflicts or not. So it's entirely possible that
> it didn't conflict for you, but applied cleanly and sanely.
>
hrm, could be. It would be strange for that to happen quietly with fuzz=1
and to still produce a compileable result.
But there weren't any patches in this git-merge which weren't in 2.6.23-mm1
so maybe something like that happened. Or maybe that fact that this pull
only contained _some_ of the ext4 patches which were in -mm somehow affected
things.
Oh well, I should have sent the ext4 changes via Ted anyway.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists