[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1507832866.5497.2.camel@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 21:27:46 +0300
From: Luciano Coelho <luciano.coelho@...el.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
Chaya Rachel Ivgi <chaya.rachel.ivgi@...el.com>,
Shahar S Matityahu <shahar.s.matityahu@...el.com>,
Wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the wireless-drivers-next tree with
the wireless-drivers tree
On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 19:21 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 09:16:36PM +0300, Luciano Coelho wrote:
>
> > This is weird... The previous conflict was the exact opposite of
> > this.
> > 44fd09 came in from wireless-drivers and dd05f9 came from wireless-
> > drivers-next. I don't understand why it is saying the opposite
> > here...
>
> I may have confused the trees when I was pasting things in, the
> commits
> are filled in by hand.
Ah, okay. But still, if the same patches conflicted twice, why wasn't
there only one occurrence with both conflicts at once?
--
Luca.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists