From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (relay1.mentorg.com [192.94.38.131]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25FD2E003E1 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:18:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1RyAaV-0003DV-Av from Hollis_Blanchard@mentor.com ; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:18:07 -0800 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-05.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.43]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:17:21 -0800 Received: from [172.30.11.144] (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-05.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.43) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:18:05 -0800 Message-ID: <4F3D8EAD.2010602@mentor.com> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:18:05 -0800 From: Hollis Blanchard Organization: Mentor Graphics, Embedded Systems Division User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce Ashfield References: <4F3D6431.70505@mentor.com> <4F3D7F0D.3050904@windriver.com> <4F3D883C.8070709@mentor.com> <4F3D8AFD.6080307@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: <4F3D8AFD.6080307@windriver.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Feb 2012 23:17:21.0796 (UTC) FILETIME=[2296CC40:01CCED01] Cc: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: trouble using a local kernel repo X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:18:09 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 02/16/2012 03:02 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > That's the problem. I have a patch that detects this and abort is a non > bare upstream is used. I just need to send them .. which I'll do when > I get back to my desk next week. > > There are two reason for this bare clone requirement: > > - technical: this scales to several hundred branches. cloning, and > iterating > remote branches to create local tracking branches is noisy and > time consuming. So there's a trick that has been in use for years > that you can clone a bare upstream, and mass convert the branches > to local in a single operation. > > - social: you want to do your development in a different tree from the > one that is being cloned and used. That way the tree is clean, and > you > are building what you expect. Do I want to do my development in a different tree? Are you sure? ;) I don't need to scale to hundreds of branches -- I just have one small patch I wanted to test. I already have it in a "clean" tree -- it's a committed changeset, with a commit message and everything, even though I haven't even been able to *test* it yet! I'm just trying to test a small kernel/meta patch, and the poorly documented list of setup requirements is growing longer and longer. All this stuff may be good practice for a more complicated scenario, but so far it seems like enormous overkill for my use case... Hollis Blanchard Mentor Graphics, Embedded Systems Division