[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1LDL51KW2jJdOacAxNP=Gk9YSdcP2LfX8ZasLOdcibDg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:12:42 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sean Young <sean@...s.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb-next tree with the
v4l-dvb tree
On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 2:51 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/media/platform/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
> 63604a143fe1 ("media: seco-cec: fix building with RC_CORE=m")
>
> from the v4l-dvb tree and commit:
>
> 81527254e151 ("media: seco: depend on CONFIG_RC_CORE=y when not a module")
>
> from the v4l-dvb-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just used the v4l-dvb tree version) and can carry the
> fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned,
> but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream
> maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want
> to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to
> minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
Thanks!
Both patches are correct, they just use slightly different syntax, so
the merge is fine as well.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists