[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1003061319530.31447@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 13:26:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: Please pull logfs tree
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Jörn Engel wrote:
>
> 1) pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/joern/logfs.git
> and apply the patch at the bottom yourself.
Not quite - it needs to be applied while merging, rather than applied
separately. It's a conflict, even though it's not a data-conflict, but a
semantic one.
But that's trivial enough. "git pull --no-commit" + fixup + "git commit"
is trivially done, now that I was fore-warned. Thanks.
> 2) pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/joern/logfs_for_2.6.34
> A tree with the patch applied that won't work standalone but will work
> after being pulled into your tree (tested locally).
No, that's horrible. Unbisectable. Not that anybody probably cares in this
case, but it's fundamentally wrong to merge something that doesn't work
before the merge.
> 3) pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/joern/logfs_for_2.6.34_alternative
> A tree that merged your tree and the logfs tree, then has the patch
> applied. Works standalone but has an additional merge commit.
That's ok, but I already did the trivial merge, which actually had another
conflict too (which showed up as a real data conflict on the Kconfig
file).
Linus
--
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