[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080701092820.GA31309@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:28:20 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: more header fixes
* Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com> wrote:
> > or perhaps we could include it in tip/master right now as well, if
> > you did another branch that excluded the files below. That would
> > make merging a lot easier - and we could do a second phase in
> > v2.6.27-rc1. Hm?
>
> I don't think we really need to resolve conflicts at all. What we can
> do is simply to re-run the scripts against tip/master whenever you
> want the update.
ok, lets do it that way.
> Also, by the way: Can -tip now be cloned with --shared to save space
> as long as I only have branches with references to commits in
> tip/master? Or is this still to be considered unsafe?
it's unsafe if we ever rewind a commit that you rely on later, and
git-gc zaps it from tip.git?
i think it would be better to not rely on that yet. The overwhelming
majority of activities in tip.git are append-only, but the integration
branches (which are included in tip/master) get regenerated frequently.
If you base on a topic branch itself (say tip/x86/nmi) - that should be
pretty stable.
Ingo
--
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