[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080213175552.GA18984@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:55:52 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jeff@...zik.org,
arjan@...radead.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-))
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 05:36:41AM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 10:16:53PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > I was amazed at how slow stgit was when I tried it out. I use
> > git-quiltimport a lot and I don't think it's any slower than just using
> > quilt on its own. So I think that the speed issue should be the same.
>
> I like using "guilt" because I can easily reapply the patchset using
> "guilt push -a", which is just slightly fewer characters to type than
> "git-quiltimport". This also means that I don't need to switch back
> and forth between "git mode" and "quilt mode" when I'm editing the
> patches (either directly by editing the patch files, in which case
> afterwards I do a "guilt pop -a; guilt push -a", or by using "guilt
> pop", "guilt push", and "guilt refresh").
I had problems getting guilt to preserve metadata properly last time I
tried it, and it forced me to work with the same location and format
that the original developers used, which wasn't as flexable as quilt
could handle from what I recall.
But I'll try it again, it might have gotten better...
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists