From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: attempted manual merge of the ubifs tree
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:33:41 +0300
Message-ID: <4886D0C5.2090009@nokia.com>
References: <20080723161109.a5e44c91.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Reply-To: Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
	format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Return-path: <linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.105.134]:27484 "EHLO
	mgw-mx09.nokia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750893AbYGWGhd (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-next@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 23 Jul 2008 02:37:33 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20080723161109.a5e44c91.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-next.vger.kernel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org

Hi Stephen,

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got a lot of conflicts aga=
inst
> the ubi tree.  I can only assume that the ubifs tree was based on a
> different version of the ubi tree than what I have in linux-next toda=
y.
>=20
> I have dropped the ubifs tree for today.

Apologies, my fault. Fixed.

--=20
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (=D0=90=D1=80=D1=82=D1=91=D0=BC =D0=91=D0=B8=D1=82=D1=8E=
=D1=86=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=B9)