diff for duplicates of <20141220002349.29014.63354@quantum>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 78d0f89..7408abf 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ parent clock" the first time that you look at the schematic.
 > some effect on the output of the child clock.  That would be one 
 > definition which might be consistent with your comments.  The problem with 
 > that is that it means that a clock can have multiple simultaneously-active 
-> parents, which I'd naïvely think we'd want to avoid, if we could.
+> parents, which I'd na?vely think we'd want to avoid, if we could.
 
 You're right to say that we're talking about a software abstraction. In
 general we should model this abstraction after the hardware as much as
@@ -210,8 +210,3 @@ Mike
 > 
 > 
 > - Paul
-
-_______________________________________________
-linux-arm-kernel mailing list
-linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
-http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 76101b7..c569b30 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -8,21 +8,10 @@
  "ref\0alpine.DEB.2.02.1412181717450.3102@utopia.booyaka.com\0"
  "ref\020141218233739.29014.73421@quantum\0"
  "ref\0alpine.DEB.2.02.1412190034040.3102@utopia.booyaka.com\0"
- "From\0Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>\0"
- "Subject\0Re: regression: Clock changes in next-20141205 break at least omap4\0"
+ "From\0mturquette@linaro.org (Mike Turquette)\0"
+ "Subject\0regression: Clock changes in next-20141205 break at least omap4\0"
  "Date\0Fri, 19 Dec 2014 16:23:49 -0800\0"
- "To\0Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>\0"
- "Cc\0Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>"
-  khilman@linaro.org
-  Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
-  Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com>
-  Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
-  Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
-  t-kristo@ti.com
-  Paul Walmsley <pwalmsley@nvidia.com>
-  linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
-  linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
- " Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>\0"
+ "To\0linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "Quoting Paul Walmsley (2014-12-18 18:15:59)\n"
@@ -144,7 +133,7 @@
  "> some effect on the output of the child clock.  That would be one \n"
  "> definition which might be consistent with your comments.  The problem with \n"
  "> that is that it means that a clock can have multiple simultaneously-active \n"
- "> parents, which I'd na\303\257vely think we'd want to avoid, if we could.\n"
+ "> parents, which I'd na?vely think we'd want to avoid, if we could.\n"
  "\n"
  "You're right to say that we're talking about a software abstraction. In\n"
  "general we should model this abstraction after the hardware as much as\n"
@@ -236,11 +225,6 @@
  "> :-)\n"
  "> \n"
  "> \n"
- "> - Paul\n"
- "\n"
- "_______________________________________________\n"
- "linux-arm-kernel mailing list\n"
- "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\n"
- http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
+ > - Paul
 
-6b582763933c98521ff71304027af72a1e6be64cbae2a49bf2d2953d1ae3c2ff
+d65fa3818867e0e0c8ac97b801a892e51842bde2801ddd6f971f1ebbd8c6cf14
