linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH 06/59] mv kernel/acpi/processor.c

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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1173833497.30118.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:51:37 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, Andi Kleen <ak@....de>,
	Glauber de Oliveira Costa <glommer@...il.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 06/59] mv kernel/acpi/processor.c

On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 14:32 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > Move kernel/acpi/processor.c to the common hold.
> 
> Please use
> 
> 	git diff -M

OK, thanks!  I'm still quite a git-nubie.

I'll update all the move patches. It may take a bit of hand work.

What I really did to do this patch series was to make all my changes in
git.  But the changes where not smooth from change set to change set. So
I did one big git-diff, and then used good old midnight commander (mc)
to parse the patches. And then pulled them into quilt to comment and
send them.


> 
> for things like this.
> 
> In fact, even if you weren't a git user, I'd ask you to *become* one just 
> because I think that it's a *lot* more productive if people actually see 
> renames as renames, and will see what - if anything - changed when 
> renaming.
> 
> The "-M" flag isn't the default, simply because it generates patches that 
> cannot be applied with regular "patch", but for something like this, I 
> think it's practically imperative. The old kind of "remove file" + "add 
> file" patch just isn't acceptable when there are very viable alternaties.

I wish I knew this before breaking it up.   But I'm sure I can do
another big patch and automate these updates :)

-- Steve


-
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/