From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Mundt Subject: Re: linux-next: suspend tree build failure Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 07:47:49 +0900 Message-ID: <20090818224749.GA26661@linux-sh.org> References: <20090818183049.8bde1ee6.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <200908182343.32375.rjw@sisk.pl> <20090818221301.GA20676@linux-sh.org> <200908190040.50949.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from 124x34x33x190.ap124.ftth.ucom.ne.jp ([124.34.33.190]:53230 "EHLO master.linux-sh.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751022AbZHRWrs (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:47:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200908190040.50949.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:40:50AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday 19 August 2009, Paul Mundt wrote: > > Argh, and rebased in the process, again. This is now the second time in > > as many days this has been rebased, meaning I have to throw away my topic > > branch and re-create. I thought this was going to remain stable? I would > > like the SH runtime PM code to get some coverage in -next, but I can't > > merge it in to my tree if the suspend tree keeps rebasing every day. > > Well, my linux-next branch is not to guaranteed to be stable, just like the > entire linux-next tree. > > Once the patch stops making trouble, I'll move it into my for-linus branch, > which _is_ guaranteed not to be rebased (in fact it's never rebased). > > I haven't done it yet exactly because of these build problems. Please wait > for a couple of days more for things to settle down. > Ah, ok, I misunderstood the intention of your -next branch. I'll wait for it to cool off, thanks. ;-)