From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.251]:39962 "EHLO wolverine02.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750978Ab0CYWtv (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:49:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] generic arm for MSM From: Daniel Walker In-Reply-To: References: <1269553937.21793.40.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 15:49:24 -0700 Message-ID: <1269557364.21793.52.camel@c-dwalke-linux.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Nicolas Pitre Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 18:46 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > These are all mostly small patches that I've sent out a few times with > > no comments. Let me know if you see any issues. > > > > The following changes since commit 7ee744f22ffad619e23912a22d1b2795e10ed825: > > Stephen Rothwell (1): > > Add linux-next specific files for 20100324 > > Never base your tree on linux-next. You really should use a stable > tree, such as Linus' tree. The linux-next tree is constantly thrown > away and rebuilt, and your own tree will keep a reference on that > obsoleted linux-next version otherwise. I only based this pull request on next , since I can't get Russell tree anyplace else. I've had patches in the past which I've had to use next cause there are underlying changes that I can only find in next .. So no I don't base development trees on next generally. Daniel