linux-kernel - Re: New MFD tree for linux-next

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 18 Mar 2013 00:39:07 +0100
From:	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: New MFD tree for linux-next

Hi Stephen,

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 01:27:53PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Samuel,
> 
> On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 17:46:25 +0100 Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 01:02:01AM +0100, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> > > 
> > > I am moving the MFD development from mfd-2.6.git/for-next to a new mfd-next
> > > tree:
> > > 
> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sameo/mfd-next.git
> > > 
> > > Could you please point linux-next at it ? Many thanks in advance.
> 
> Done.  
Thanks.

> I assume that you are still using the for-next branch?
I will update for-next branch to be in sync with mfd-next until the 3.10 merge
window closes. After that I'll probably delete the mfd-2.6.git tree.


> > I'm also carrying MFD fixes through the mfd-fixes tree:
> > 
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sameo/mfd-fixes.git
> > 
> > Could you please also add it to linux-next ?
> 
> What branch should I use of that?
Ah, I didn't see that the remote tree still carries the mfd-2.6 branches, I'll
remove them.
Please use master.


> BTW, those two trees look very similar (in fact "diff -u <(git ls-remote
> mfd) <(git ls-remote mfd-fixes)" only shows a couple of differences in
> all the refs).  You do realise that I can use 2 different branches of one
> tree, right (as can others)?
I understand that :) But using 2 trees rather than 2 separate branches is more
convenient to my personal workflow.

Cheers,
Samuel.

-- 
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/
--
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/