linux-kernel - Question about Git tree methodology.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20060724163145.5819ce7d.kernel1@cyberdogtech.com>
Date:	Mon, 24 Jul 2006 16:31:45 -0400
From:	Matt LaPlante <kernel1@...erdogtech.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Question about Git tree methodology.

Hi all,
  I've been playing around with setting up a personal git tree for kernel patches.  I've followed Jeff Garzik's guide, as well as some of the kernel.org docs.  I have no problem setting it up, however I have a question about which method to use for my tree.  Basically I just want to use it as a method of tracking my own trivial patches (and perhaps give maintainers easier access to them).  I've looked through some of the trees on kernel.org for guidance.  
  My issue is, if I do a git clone, I wind up with all the history from the kernel git.  This seems excessive and useless for just tracking my own work.  I could alternatively download the source and init a new tree, but I believe it would make keeping up to date with the kernel.org git more complicated.  
  What method is used by the various trees on kernel.org to deal with this?  Is there a way to use the kernel.org git as a base, but only track my own changes?  

Thanks.

-- 
Matt LaPlante
CCNP, CCDP, A+, Linux+, CQS
kernel1@...erdogtech.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/