Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soctree

[Jason Cooper]

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 02:09:00PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> it's this commit:
> 
> commit 89602312c5755c87a5ca6ba8ef6b0fce9d510951
> Merge: a0cec78 f23afe2
> Author:     Jason Cooper <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> AuthorDate: Wed Aug 14 18:55:13 2013 +0000
> Commit:     Jason Cooper <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CommitDate: Wed Aug 14 18:55:13 2013 +0000
> 
>     Merge remote-tracking branch 'arm-soc/for-next' into mvebu/drivers
> 

grmbl... Yep, that's my mistake.  I usually do a temp branch for
merge-testing against arm-soc/for-next and building.  Apparently I
forgot to make the branch first.  My apologies.

I've fixed up mvebu/drivers, and I'm build testing a rebuilt for-next
now.

> You merged back the for-next branch from arm-soc into your tree. Big no-no.

Yep, \shame/.

> This brings up the subject of subplatform trees and conflicts and
> -next. I wonder if we should ask Stephen to put all these trees in a
> category where if they have any substantial conflicts or weirdness
> like this, that he just drops it for the current -next build instead
> of spending effort on them.

Agreed.  A tree hierarchy of sorts.  mvebu and other sub-arch trees
should definitely be dropped for the day with minimal investigation.

thx,

Jason.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/