From: Jesper Juhl
Date: Sat Apr 30 2005 - 17:49:24 EST
On Sat, 30 Apr 2005, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2005, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> > If we stick with git it might make sense not to include a linux-patch. cogito
> > is quite fast to export using a commit id. Suspect some bandwidth could be
> > saved if you just stated the commit id that you based the mm patch on.
> > In case anyone is wondering how build this from a cogito/git db... Find the
> > cogito announcement on lkml install and update cogito. Then folliw the instructions
> > in the README and download the kernel's db. Next search lkml to find the commit id
> > of rc3 (a2755a80f40e5794ddc20e00f781af9d6320fafb) and verify you have it correct
> > with:
> > cg-mkpatch a2755a80f40e5794ddc20e00f781af9d6320fafb
> > then export a tree with
> > cg-export ../12-3-1 a2755a80f40e5794ddc20e00f781af9d6320fafb
> > and cd over to the new dir and patch with mm and have fun.
> That'd be a horribly convoluted procedure and make automation difficult,
> -mm shouldn't be that difficult to use. Also linus.patch used to be the
> current -bk snapshot.
I agree. Getting a -mm kernel currently requires nothing more than patch -
that's good. Introducing a git/cogito requirement will reduce the
users/testers of -mm - not good.
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/