[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BEB8BA9.5070001@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 02:18:33 -0300
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Mauro,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree produced a mountain of
> conflicts so I have used the version from next-20100512 for today.
> Please either merge Linus' tree into yours or rebase you tree on top of
> Linus' tree. There are a large number of commits that are in your tree
> that have been rebased before being included into Linus' tree and this
> caused conflicts with further changes in your tree.
I'll be pulling from Linus on my tree. I did it yesterday, after my last changes,
but it seems that I've made a huge mistake... Several conflicts that I've already
fixed reappeared. I suspect that I've merged it with an older temporary branch
by mistake.
Anyway, it is fixed, by simply going back to the last reflog before the error,
and re-merging the new patches again. A pull from Linus didn't show any conflict.
So, it should be now OK for you to merge.
> Please consider changing your work flow so that you don't rebase things
> in your tree before sending them to Linus.
I'm already in process of changing my procedure. The problem is that I didn't find
yet a perfect way to handle my tree. I'm getting some new ideas, and intend to implement
them for 2.6.35 development cycle (linux-next for 2.6.36).
--
Cheers,
Mauro
--
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