From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:40:51 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] Pull request: Integrate latest yaffs2 In-Reply-To: <201204261028.44543.manningc2@actrix.gen.nz> References: <201204231346.32195.manningc2@actrix.gen.nz> <201204260908.42353.manningc2@actrix.gen.nz> <20120425222137.GA21665@bill-the-cat> <201204261028.44543.manningc2@actrix.gen.nz> Message-ID: <4F987D73.5060805@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 04/25/2012 03:28 PM, Charles Manning wrote: > On Thursday 26 April 2012 10:21:37 Tom Rini wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 09:08:42AM +1200, Charles Manning wrote: >>> On Tuesday 24 April 2012 08:58:09 you wrote: >>>> Dear Charles Manning, >>>> >>>> In message<201204231346.32195.manningc2@actrix.gen.nz> you wrote: >>>>> I recently sent a message to the list announcing a method for >>>>> patching in the latest yaffs2. >>>>> >>>>> u-boot updated with the latest yaffs2 can be pulled from >>>>> git at github.com:cdhmanning/u-boot-yaffs2.git >>>> >>>> Please read http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Patches and post proper >>>> patch(es) for review. >>> >>> At least one of the files exceeds the 100k patch limit. >>> >>> I know you'd like patches, but there are two really easy options for >>> someone on the inside to do this: >>> >>> 1) Run the script off the yaffs git >>> -or- >>> 2) Merge from the https://github.com/cdhmanning/u-boot-yaffs2 >> >> So this means things have gotten really far out of sync. Would you be >> willing to say that in the future you'll be submitting regular well >> formatted and broken down patches like I assume you do in the yaffs2 >> tree itself so we can avoid this in the future? > > yaffs went through a large reformat a while ago meaning that the current code > does not diff well against the old code. Future changes shuld be a lot easier > to handle with direct patching. > > yaffs changes typically don't go through the yaffs list since people with > direct git checkin access do 95-99% of the changes. Right, but a proper set of individual patches could be posted and reviewed in the future, yes? -- Tom