[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120111083429.GU5446@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:34:29 +0100
From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: please update the i.MX tree
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 09:34:57AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Sascha,
>
> On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 09:30:20 +0100 Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:52:18AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > It looks like most (if not all) of the i.MX tree has been merged into the
> > > arm-soc (and Linus') tree, so could you please update the i.MX tree to
> > > eliminate the conflicts I am getting.
> >
> > Did this. Sorry, I was not aware that there is something in this branch.
>
> Did you push it out? I just checked and it hasn't changed. Just to be
> clear, I am fetching git://git.pengutronix.de/git/imx/linux-2.6.git
> branch for-next and it hasn't changed since last September.
I failed to wait until my push returned. It failed due to
non-fast-forward pushing. Really fixed this now.
>
> Should I, instead, just remove that tree from linux-next and let you send
> stuff just via the arm-soc (or arm)tree?
Yes, that's probably best. That's what I do anyway.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
--
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