[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090115165425.GA7517@bombe-desk.opditex>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:54:25 +0100
From: Andreas Bombe <andreas.bombe@...um.de>
To: Kyle Moffett <kyle@...fetthome.net>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@....de>,
git@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: current git kernel has strange problems during bisect
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 03:26:09PM -0500, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Christian Borntraeger
> <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:
> > In my opinion we should really avoid subtree merges in the future as a curtesy
> > to people who do the uncool work of testing, problem tracking and bisecting.
> > </rant>
>
> As an alternative, you can relatively easily rewrite the following
> independent histories:
>
> A -- B -- C
> X -- Y -- Z
>
> To look like this:
>
> A -- B -- C -- X' -- Y' -- Z'
>
> Where X' is (C + sub/dir/X), Y' is (C + sub/dir/Y), etc...
Given that the subtree may have been in development for a long time, it
is almost a certainty that the older commits may compile on A but not
on C. By basing it all on C you create a lot of uncompilable commits
which hurt bisection just as bad. At least with missing kernel sources
it is obvious that an attempt at compilation is futile and a waste of
time.
--
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