From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kyle Moffett" Subject: Re: current git kernel has strange problems during bisect Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:13:30 -0500 Message-ID: References: <200901111602.53082.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <20090111194258.GA4840@uranus.ravnborg.org> <200901112239.20306.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> <20090115165425.GA7517@bombe-desk.opditex> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Kyle Moffett" , "Christian Borntraeger" , "Linus Torvalds" , "Sam Ravnborg" , "Johanne X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 16 00:14:57 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LNbQO-0005xz-Cy for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:14:56 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757720AbZAOXNe (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:13:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755857AbZAOXNd (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:13:33 -0500 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.249]:58377 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755535AbZAOXNc (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:13:32 -0500 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d40so621805and.1 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:13:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.32.6 with SMTP id f6mr1550214anf.90.1232061211087; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:13:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.168.7 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:13:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20090115165425.GA7517@bombe-desk.opditex> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Andreas Bombe wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 03:26:09PM -0500, Kyle Moffett wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Christian Borntraeger >> wrote: >> > In my opinion we should really avoid subtree merges in the future as a curtesy >> > to people who do the uncool work of testing, problem tracking and bisecting. >> > >> >> As an alternative, you can relatively easily rewrite the following >> independent histories: >> >> A -- B -- C >> X -- Y -- Z >> >> To look like this: >> >> A -- B -- C -- X' -- Y' -- Z' >> >> Where X' is (C + sub/dir/X), Y' is (C + sub/dir/Y), etc... > > Given that the subtree may have been in development for a long time, it > is almost a certainty that the older commits may compile on A but not > on C. By basing it all on C you create a lot of uncompilable commits > which hurt bisection just as bad. At least with missing kernel sources > it is obvious that an attempt at compilation is futile and a waste of > time. No, the older commits will compile just fine as they don't actually reference the new code from any of the parent makefiles. It would effectively be "dead code" until the "merge" in the commit *after* Z' in which you add lines to "sub/Kconfig" and "sub/Kbuild" which reference "sub/dir/*". Cheers, Kyle Moffett