On Wednesday 05 February 2003 14:10, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 02:04:21PM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> > The change from block_truncate_page to nobh_truncate_page was done
> > in Changeset 1.879.43.1. This was created on January 9th, but not
> > merged into Linus' tree until Monday, so it is not in 2.5.59. I
> > think the
>
> if you think it's normal the thing sounds very messy. I mean, how can
> a changeset be numbered 1.879.43.1 and not be included in 2.5.59?
>
> The way I understood it is that when Linus merges "stuff", this
> "stuff" gets a changeset number in the future, not in the past. No
> matter if the "stuff" was created in the past. Is this the case or
> not?
I don't understand the changeset numbering myself, so I guess Larry will
have to answer this one.
> I mean, somehow there must be a way to number the changesets so that
> applying them in order generates something coherent.
>
> Andrea
-- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 07 2003 - 22:00:18 EST