Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Jon Smirl]

Continuing on with kernel archeology for embedded systems, any
interest in making a git tree with all of the kernel versions from the
beginning up to the start of the current git tree? No history in the
tree, just a simple way to quickly fetch and select a copy of all the
various old releases. I know they are all available ftp, git tree
would organize them all in one place and let you fetch them all at
once.

If this is small enough you could add it to the current kernel tree.
Git's super diffing performance might make this fairly small.

My dream system lets me checkout an ancient version, apply the diff
from the vendor (or expand a tarball), use git status to see what
files changed, and git diff to get detailed changes (all minus CVS
keyword expansion noise). Major bonus points if it can detect detect a
subsystem that has been backported.

-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Jul 22 2007 16:49, Jon Smirl wrote:
>
> Continuing on with kernel archeology for embedded systems, any
> interest in making a git tree with all of the kernel versions from the
> beginning up to the start of the current git tree?

Well, it would be cool if history was somehow available (I recognize
this would be a lot of work). One currently has to go through the
bk repo if something is to be searched for in that timeframe.

> No history in the
> tree, just a simple way to quickly fetch and select a copy of all the
> various old releases. I know they are all available ftp, git tree
> would organize them all in one place and let you fetch them all at
> once.

In fact, we could bisect on it. Though not sure how useful that is
with really old versions :)

> If this is small enough you could add it to the current kernel tree.
> Git's super diffing performance might make this fairly small.
>

	Jan
-- 

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Paul Mundt]

On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 11:00:15PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jul 22 2007 16:49, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > Continuing on with kernel archeology for embedded systems, any
> > interest in making a git tree with all of the kernel versions from the
> > beginning up to the start of the current git tree?
> 
> Well, it would be cool if history was somehow available (I recognize
> this would be a lot of work). One currently has to go through the
> bk repo if something is to be searched for in that timeframe.
> 
Err, that's crap. Have you even looked at gitweb? There's at least:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/history.git

This has trees all the way back to 2.5.0.

and Linus also has:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/old-2.6-bkcvs.git

for the BK history.

That's already more history than most people have any immediate use for,
going beyond that starts getting in to general completeness before
practical application territory.

Anyone still sending 2.4 patches with the intent of them being moved
forward and applied to a current kernel needs to be killfiled.

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Jul 23 2007 06:13, Paul Mundt wrote:
>> 
>Err, that's crap. Have you even looked at gitweb? There's at least:
>
>git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/history.git
>This has trees all the way back to 2.5.0.
>
>and Linus also has:
>
>git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/old-2.6-bkcvs.git
>
>for the BK history.

Oh I did not know that. I don't glance too much around in git://git.kernel.org/
because there are sooo many :)



	Jan
-- 

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Jul 22 2007 23:46, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>On Jul 23 2007 06:13, Paul Mundt wrote:
>>> 
>>Err, that's crap. Have you even looked at gitweb? There's at least:
>>
>>git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/history.git
>>This has trees all the way back to 2.5.0.

Actually back to 2.4.0, including history. That I'd call mission done then :)


	Jan
-- 

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[H. Peter Anvin]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jul 22 2007 23:46, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Jul 23 2007 06:13, Paul Mundt wrote:
>>> Err, that's crap. Have you even looked at gitweb? There's at least:
>>>
>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/history.git
>>> This has trees all the way back to 2.5.0.
> 
> Actually back to 2.4.0, including history. That I'd call mission done then :)
> 

Wouldn't be hard to make a git tree with all the patches all the way
back to 0.01 even...

	-hpa

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Michael Tharp]

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Wouldn't be hard to make a git tree with all the patches all the way
> back to 0.01 even...

It'd be delightful from a completeness standpoint (and I do love
completeness), but considering it already takes a good 20 minutes to
clone the 2.6 tree over a respectable cable connection, I'd have to
object on the grounds of size. Now, if it was kept off in its own tree
for people who don't mind ravaging kernel.org resources to satisfy their
own curiosity, that's fine too.

  -- m. tharp

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Jon Smirl]

On 7/22/07, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> wrote:
> Anyone still sending 2.4 patches with the intent of them being moved
> forward and applied to a current kernel needs to be killfiled.

These patches are coming from companies that aren't interested in
participating in the GPL process but are being forced into releasing
code because of the license. Some of them will go out of their way to
make the changes difficult to read. All of the patches I am looking at
come from embedded systems, many of these systems are still shipping
2.4 kernels.

Most of the patches contain junk, but there are occasional diamonds.
One I'm looking at contains code for accessing encryption hardware.
The goal is to look at the vendor diffs and see if I can spot anything
useful. Spotting something useful can be hard if there are 100,000
lines of noise in the diffs, I'm also trying to spot missing drivers
so that we can ask for more code.

-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Jon Smirl]

On 7/22/07, Michael Tharp <gxti@partiallystapled.com> wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > Wouldn't be hard to make a git tree with all the patches all the way
> > back to 0.01 even...
>
> It'd be delightful from a completeness standpoint (and I do love
> completeness), but considering it already takes a good 20 minutes to
> clone the 2.6 tree over a respectable cable connection, I'd have to
> object on the grounds of size. Now, if it was kept off in its own tree
> for people who don't mind ravaging kernel.org resources to satisfy their
> own curiosity, that's fine too.

git has an extremely effective diffing mechanism. You may surprised at
how little it adds.
For example, git compressed the 2.6GB mozilla cvs tree down to 400MB.

I used to clone trees all the time, but now I'm much better at using
git and I haven't cloned a complete tree from kernel.org in a year.
git remote is a cool feature.

-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Linus Torvalds]

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
> Wouldn't be hard to make a git tree with all the patches all the way
> back to 0.01 even...

I actually tried to get something like this together back in the BK days 
and early in the SCO saga. It was pretty painful to try to find all the 
historic trees and patches - they're all in different format, and some of 
them are unreliable (ie CVS imports by people like Ted).

The good news is that git would be a lot more natural to the process of 
trying to create a history, because you could basically import random 
trees, and tag them as just independent trees, and then re-create the 
history after-the-fact by trying to stitch them all together. And if you 
find a new tree, you'd just re-stitch it - something that was very hard to 
do with BK (and BK generally wouldn't help you with keeping multiple 
independent trees around, and wouldn't generally accept the notion of 
re-doing the histories and keeping various versions of the histories 
around).

So I've been thinking about trying to re-create some really old history 
into git, but it's still a lot of work.. And obviously not very useful, 
just interesting from an archeological standpoint.

			Linus

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> So I've been thinking about trying to re-create some really old history 
> into git, but it's still a lot of work.. And obviously not very useful, 
> just interesting from an archeological standpoint.

I started this once.

I have (sort of) a GIT tree with all Linux revisions that I could find 
from v0.01 up to v1.0.9.  But the most interesting information and also 
what is the most time consuming is the retrieval of announcement 
messages for those releases in old mailing list or newsgroup archives to 
serve as commit log data.  It seems to be even arder to find for post 
v1.0 releases.


Nicolas

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Linus Torvalds]

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> 
> I started this once.
> 
> I have (sort of) a GIT tree with all Linux revisions that I could find 
> from v0.01 up to v1.0.9.  But the most interesting information and also 
> what is the most time consuming is the retrieval of announcement 
> messages for those releases in old mailing list or newsgroup archives to 
> serve as commit log data.  It seems to be even arder to find for post 
> v1.0 releases.

Yes, I agree. Google finds some of them, but (a) I was never very good 
about announcements anyway and (b) there's nothing really good to search 
for, so it's very hit-and-miss.

Some of the really early release notes are easy to find, just because I 
made them available with the sources, but mostly I'd just have posten to 
the newsgroup/mailing lists.

If somebody creates a reasonably good tree (ie all the trees, easily 
diffable, tied together with at least *some* commit history and the most 
easily found release notes), I'm willing to try to spend some time just 
writing down recollections from looking at the diffs. Not very reliable, 
but better than nothing. This is the kind of thing that the "notes" thing 
could be useful for, since there are others around who might also be 
interested in adding their commentary.

		Linus

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Theodore Tso]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 09:55:24AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> I actually tried to get something like this together back in the BK days 
> and early in the SCO saga. It was pretty painful to try to find all the 
> historic trees and patches - they're all in different format, and some of 
> them are unreliable (ie CVS imports by people like Ted).

Um, *I* never had the bad taste to import Linux kernels into CVS.  :-)

I'm pretty sure we never had anything like that on tsx-11.mit.edu, either.

    	   	   	     	      	   - Ted

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> 
> 
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > 
> > I started this once.
> > 
> > I have (sort of) a GIT tree with all Linux revisions that I could find 
> > from v0.01 up to v1.0.9.  But the most interesting information and also 
> > what is the most time consuming is the retrieval of announcement 
> > messages for those releases in old mailing list or newsgroup archives to 
> > serve as commit log data.  It seems to be even arder to find for post 
> > v1.0 releases.
> 
> Yes, I agree. Google finds some of them, but (a) I was never very good 
> about announcements anyway and (b) there's nothing really good to search 
> for, so it's very hit-and-miss.
> 
> Some of the really early release notes are easy to find, just because I 
> made them available with the sources, but mostly I'd just have posten to 
> the newsgroup/mailing lists.

That's what I used when available, especially to properly time stamp 
those commits.  Using the latest date on files included in the archive 
isn't always reliable.

OK so actually what I have is from v0.01 up to v1.0 creating 93 commits.

What is missing is:

 - v0.02 sources

 - v0.10 announcement

 - v0.96 sources

 - v0.99.12 announcement

 - sources for v0.99.13{abcdefghij} (got k, don't know where the serie 
   ends) as well as announcements for all of them

 - all announcements for v0.99.14{a-z} except for pl14r

 - announcements for pl15c to pl15j, 1.0-pre1, and ALPHA-1.0.

Otherwise the archive appears fairly complete with almost 3 years of 
Linux development history captured in a 3MB pack file.


Nicolas

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Theodore Tso wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 09:55:24AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > I actually tried to get something like this together back in the BK days 
> > and early in the SCO saga. It was pretty painful to try to find all the 
> > historic trees and patches - they're all in different format, and some of 
> > them are unreliable (ie CVS imports by people like Ted).
> 
> Um, *I* never had the bad taste to import Linux kernels into CVS.  :-)
> 
> I'm pretty sure we never had anything like that on tsx-11.mit.edu, either.

Well, I remember having to clean up some of the source archives I've 
found which contained CVS directories.  Can't tell which one anymore, 
but they were amongst the oldest ones.


Nicolas

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Linus Torvalds]

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Theodore Tso wrote:
> 
> Um, *I* never had the bad taste to import Linux kernels into CVS.  :-)

Ahh. I just checked. 

RCS.

There are old linux archive of yours that has some RCS files in it (0.10 
and 0.12 at least)

		Linus

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Linus Torvalds]

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> 
> What is missing is:
> 
>  - v0.02 sources

I think this really is gone. 0.03 was such an improvement on 0.02 that I 
think what happened was that I literally removed 0.02 (hey, it wasn't 
historically interesting at the time!). It's not the first time people 
have wondered about it.

0.03 was the first version where you could actually do things under Linux, 
and I think I could compile etc. I *think* it was released pretty close 
after 0.02, which made 0.02 appear even more flawed and a brown-paper-bag 
release.

>  - v0.10 announcement

Hmm. That one would be interesting, since the reason for the 0.03->0.10 
jump was that I was getting so happy with how it was actually working for 
me (ie able to compile itself under itself). But I don't see it, and it's 
not on google in the comp.os.minix archives either, afaik.

>  - v0.96 sources

Hmm. Odd. Might be another case of "0.96a was released as a 
brown-paper-bag fix for 0.96, and the latter hidden in shame".

Stupid bugs only appear endearing in retrospect.

>  - v0.99.12 announcement

Well, the 0.99.12 announcement is found by google.

	http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.announce/browse_thread/thread/8a19289f68a4af35/fe433c9df4b382a5?lnk=st&q=&rnum=1#fe433c9df4b382a5

In general, google groups (search by date and author, and make the group 
be something like *linux*) is good, I found the above on the first try.

>  - sources for v0.99.13{abcdefghij} (got k, don't know where the serie 
>    ends) as well as announcements for all of them
> 
>  - all announcements for v0.99.14{a-z} except for pl14r
> 
>  - announcements for pl15c to pl15j, 1.0-pre1, and ALPHA-1.0.

Many of those might not have merited announcements. At some point I was 
just making tar-balls a few days apart, to let people track it.

> Otherwise the archive appears fairly complete with almost 3 years of 
> Linux development history captured in a 3MB pack file.

Heh, nice. Those early versions are all smaller than the patch set we 
generate in a day these days :)

		Linus

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Theodore Tso]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 12:44:57PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > 
> > Um, *I* never had the bad taste to import Linux kernels into CVS.  :-)
> 
> Ahh. I just checked. 
> 
> RCS.
> 
> There are old linux archive of yours that has some RCS files in it (0.10 
> and 0.12 at least)

Ah, yes, I used to use RCS in order to generate the patches that I
sent to use.  The RCS directories were short-term, and never lasted
longer until the next kernel release.  I'm kind of surprised that I
actually had archives that had RCS files, since tsx-11 should have
just had the original tar.gz files from ftp.cs.helsinki.edu.  Maybe
for some reason the original files got nuked and I replaced it with
one of my saved files at one point.  I dunno....

       	  	      	     	     - Ted

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> 
> 
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > 
> > What is missing is:
> > 
> >  - v0.02 sources
> 
> I think this really is gone. 0.03 was such an improvement on 0.02 that I 
> think what happened was that I literally removed 0.02 (hey, it wasn't 
> historically interesting at the time!). It's not the first time people 
> have wondered about it.
> 
> 0.03 was the first version where you could actually do things under Linux, 
> and I think I could compile etc. I *think* it was released pretty close 
> after 0.02, which made 0.02 appear even more flawed and a brown-paper-bag 
> release.

Could that version be found anywhere?

> >  - v0.10 announcement
> 
> Hmm. That one would be interesting, since the reason for the 0.03->0.10 
> jump was that I was getting so happy with how it was actually working for 
> me (ie able to compile itself under itself). But I don't see it, and it's 
> not on google in the comp.os.minix archives either, afaik.

Anyone out there keeping an archive of those old posts?  Archival sites 
appear to have a black hole during that period.

> >  - v0.99.12 announcement
> 
> Well, the 0.99.12 announcement is found by google.
> 
> 	http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.announce/browse_thread/thread/8a19289f68a4af35/fe433c9df4b382a5?lnk=st&q=&rnum=1#fe433c9df4b382a5
> 
> In general, google groups (search by date and author, and make the group 
> be something like *linux*) is good, I found the above on the first try.

Yeah... Don't know what happened.  I must have found it then because I 
had a file to store it in my data directory, but somehow it was empty.  
Fixed now.


Nicolas

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Arjan van de Ven]

> What is missing is:
> 
>  - v0.02 sources
> 
>  - v0.10 announcement
> 
>  - v0.96 sources
> 
>  - v0.99.12 announcement
> 
>  - sources for v0.99.13{abcdefghij} (got k, don't know where the serie 
>    ends) as well as announcements for all of them


didn't Tigran at some point get a full history together?

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Al Viro]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 03:06:09PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>  - v0.96 sources
> 
>  - v0.99.12 announcement
> 
>  - sources for v0.99.13{abcdefghij} (got k, don't know where the serie 
>    ends) as well as announcements for all of them
> 
>  - all announcements for v0.99.14{a-z} except for pl14r
> 
>  - announcements for pl15c to pl15j, 1.0-pre1, and ALPHA-1.0.
> 
> Otherwise the archive appears fairly complete with almost 3 years of 
> Linux development history captured in a 3MB pack file.

Umm...  IIRC, tar was unhappy with several tarballs on ftp.kernel.org.
Do you have replacements (or instructions re combination of tar(1) options
to make it eat them)?

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[H. Peter Anvin]

Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 03:06:09PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>>  - v0.96 sources
>>
>>  - v0.99.12 announcement
>>
>>  - sources for v0.99.13{abcdefghij} (got k, don't know where the serie 
>>    ends) as well as announcements for all of them
>>
>>  - all announcements for v0.99.14{a-z} except for pl14r
>>
>>  - announcements for pl15c to pl15j, 1.0-pre1, and ALPHA-1.0.
>>
>> Otherwise the archive appears fairly complete with almost 3 years of 
>> Linux development history captured in a 3MB pack file.
> 
> Umm...  IIRC, tar was unhappy with several tarballs on ftp.kernel.org.
> Do you have replacements (or instructions re combination of tar(1) options
> to make it eat them)?

There is some stuff at http://mirrors.kernel.org/oldlinux/

That's all I have, I'm afraid...

	-hpa

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Al Viro wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 03:06:09PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >  - v0.96 sources
> > 
> >  - v0.99.12 announcement
> > 
> >  - sources for v0.99.13{abcdefghij} (got k, don't know where the serie 
> >    ends) as well as announcements for all of them
> > 
> >  - all announcements for v0.99.14{a-z} except for pl14r
> > 
> >  - announcements for pl15c to pl15j, 1.0-pre1, and ALPHA-1.0.
> > 
> > Otherwise the archive appears fairly complete with almost 3 years of 
> > Linux development history captured in a 3MB pack file.
> 
> Umm...  IIRC, tar was unhappy with several tarballs on ftp.kernel.org.
> Do you have replacements (or instructions re combination of tar(1) options
> to make it eat them)?

I have sanitized .tgz files that I use to stuff a Git repo with.  I 
recall that some of them were reconstructed through patching an earlier 
or later kernel version because the original ones were corrupted. Some 
patches were retrieved from other archival sites, etc.  Then the result 
was 
cross checked with summary lists like this one: 

http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0110.1/1684.html

This was a while ago so I don't remember the exact steps, but that 
wasn't always trivial.


Nicolas

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[H. Peter Anvin]

Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> 
> I have sanitized .tgz files that I use to stuff a Git repo with.  I 
> recall that some of them were reconstructed through patching an earlier 
> or later kernel version because the original ones were corrupted. Some 
> patches were retrieved from other archival sites, etc.  Then the result 
> was 
> cross checked with summary lists like this one: 
> 
> http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0110.1/1684.html
> 
> This was a while ago so I don't remember the exact steps, but that 
> wasn't always trivial.
> 

Then there is 0.95a, 0.95c and 0.95c+, which as far as I know only ever
existed as 0.95 + patches posted to alt.os.linux.

	-hpa

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > 
> > I have sanitized .tgz files that I use to stuff a Git repo with.  I 
> > recall that some of them were reconstructed through patching an earlier 
> > or later kernel version because the original ones were corrupted. Some 
> > patches were retrieved from other archival sites, etc.  Then the result 
> > was 
> > cross checked with summary lists like this one: 
> > 
> > http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0110.1/1684.html
> > 
> > This was a while ago so I don't remember the exact steps, but that 
> > wasn't always trivial.
> > 
> 
> Then there is 0.95a, 0.95c and 0.95c+, which as far as I know only ever
> existed as 0.95 + patches posted to alt.os.linux.

Indeed, already got those.


Nicolas

Git tree for old kernels

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, Jon Smirl wrote:

> Continuing on with kernel archeology for embedded systems, any
> interest in making a git tree with all of the kernel versions from the
> beginning up to the start of the current git tree?

I just put the archive I've gathered so far in a Git tree on kernel.org:

    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nico/archive.git

It is also available through gitweb from:

    http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/nico/archive.git

It currently stops at Linux v1.0. I would like to continue populating 
this archive up to the current "Linux kernel history" Git repository 
from Thomas Gleixner which currently doesn't go further back than 
v2.4.0.  This is however extremely time consuming to track down old 
mailing list and newsgroup archives in order to find announcements to 
serve as commit log material.  Therefore I'd be really glad if people 
could help me find those and send me copies of relevant announcements.  
The content of the current archive should give a good idea of what I'm 
looking for.

Also, the following items are currently missing and apparently vanished 
from the surface of the planet:

 - v0.02 sources

 - v0.03 sources and announcement

 - v0.10 announcement

 - v0.96 sources

 - sources for v0.99.13{abcdefghij} (got k, don't know where the serie
   ends) as well as announcements for all of them

 - all announcements for v0.99.14{a-z} except for pl14r

 - announcements for pl15c to pl15j, 1.0-pre1, and ALPHA-1.0.

If you happen to have any of those please drop me a note.

Otherwise the archive appears fairly complete with almost 3 years of 
Linux development history captured in a 3MB pack file.


Nicolas

Re: Git tree for old kernels

[Josef Sipek]

On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 03:24:56PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, Jon Smirl wrote:
> 
> > Continuing on with kernel archeology for embedded systems, any
> > interest in making a git tree with all of the kernel versions from the
> > beginning up to the start of the current git tree?
> 
> I just put the archive I've gathered so far in a Git tree on kernel.org:
> 
>     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nico/archive.git
> 
> It is also available through gitweb from:
> 
>     http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/nico/archive.git
 
I don't mean to nit-pick but, would it be possible to have the timestamps
for the commits closer to the release dates?

I must say, impressive work.

Thanks!

Josef 'Jeff' Sipek.

-- 
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about
telescopes.
		- Edsger Dijkstra

Re: Git tree for old kernels

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Josef Sipek wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 03:24:56PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > 
> > > Continuing on with kernel archeology for embedded systems, any
> > > interest in making a git tree with all of the kernel versions from the
> > > beginning up to the start of the current git tree?
> > 
> > I just put the archive I've gathered so far in a Git tree on kernel.org:
> > 
> >     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nico/archive.git
> > 
> > It is also available through gitweb from:
> > 
> >     http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/nico/archive.git
>  
> I don't mean to nit-pick but, would it be possible to have the timestamps
> for the commits closer to the release dates?

Well, the author timestamp already is, based on the date of the 
announcement message used for the commit log, including the timezone.  
If you find errors in those please tell me.

The commit timestamp, however, is the time when _I_ created the 
repository, hence it should not be that interesting.

> I must say, impressive work.

Thanks!


Nicolas

Re: Git tree for old kernels

[Josef Sipek]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 01:40:52PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Josef Sipek wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 03:24:56PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Continuing on with kernel archeology for embedded systems, any
> > > > interest in making a git tree with all of the kernel versions from the
> > > > beginning up to the start of the current git tree?
> > > 
> > > I just put the archive I've gathered so far in a Git tree on kernel.org:
> > > 
> > >     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nico/archive.git
> > > 
> > > It is also available through gitweb from:
> > > 
> > >     http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/nico/archive.git
> >  
> > I don't mean to nit-pick but, would it be possible to have the timestamps
> > for the commits closer to the release dates?
> 
> Well, the author timestamp already is, based on the date of the 
> announcement message used for the commit log, including the timezone.  
> If you find errors in those please tell me.

Ah ok. Too bad gitweb displays the commit times => throws off some of the
sorting too.

/me prods gitweb people

> The commit timestamp, however, is the time when _I_ created the 
> repository, hence it should not be that interesting.

Too bad that's the date you see all over the place :( 

Jeff.

-- 
NT is to UNIX what a doughnut is to a particle accelerator.

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Jan-Benedict Glaw]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 980 bytes --]

On Mon, 2007-07-23 20:10:23 -0400, Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
> 
> I have sanitized .tgz files that I use to stuff a Git repo with.  I 
> recall that some of them were reconstructed through patching an earlier 
> or later kernel version because the original ones were corrupted. Some 
> patches were retrieved from other archival sites, etc.  Then the result 
> was 
> cross checked with summary lists like this one: 
> 
> http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0110.1/1684.html
> 
> This was a while ago so I don't remember the exact steps, but that 
> wasn't always trivial.

Some years ago, I also worked on old Linux releases. Have you found
the tarballs in my directory at kernel.org?

MfG, JBG

-- 
      Jan-Benedict Glaw      jbglaw@lug-owl.de              +49-172-7608481
Signature of:             God put me on earth to accomplish a certain number of
the second  :            things. Right now I am so far behind I will never die.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:

> On Mon, 2007-07-23 20:10:23 -0400, Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
> > 
> > I have sanitized .tgz files that I use to stuff a Git repo with.  I 
> > recall that some of them were reconstructed through patching an earlier 
> > or later kernel version because the original ones were corrupted. Some 
> > patches were retrieved from other archival sites, etc.  Then the result 
> > was 
> > cross checked with summary lists like this one: 
> > 
> > http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0110.1/1684.html
> > 
> > This was a while ago so I don't remember the exact steps, but that 
> > wasn't always trivial.
> 
> Some years ago, I also worked on old Linux releases. Have you found
> the tarballs in my directory at kernel.org?

No, I didn't know about them.

>From a quick look, I think I already captured everything you have prior 
v1.0 though.


Nicolas

Re: Git tree for old kernels from before the current tree

[Oleg Verych]

* Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:02:39 -0700 (PDT)
>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>> 
>> I started this once.
>> 
>> I have (sort of) a GIT tree with all Linux revisions that I could find 
>> from v0.01 up to v1.0.9.  But the most interesting information and also 
>> what is the most time consuming is the retrieval of announcement 
>> messages for those releases in old mailing list or newsgroup archives to 
>> serve as commit log data.  It seems to be even arder to find for post 
>> v1.0 releases.
>
> Yes, I agree. Google finds some of them, but (a) I was never very good 
> about announcements anyway and (b) there's nothing really good to search 
> for, so it's very hit-and-miss.
>
> Some of the really early release notes are easy to find, just because I 
> made them available with the sources, but mostly I'd just have posten to 
> the newsgroup/mailing lists.

Maybe this can be useful somehow: ftp://ftp.shout.net/pub/users/mec/kcs
____