From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phillip Lougher Subject: Re: Subject: [PATCH 00/16] Squashfs: compressed read-only filesystem Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 00:15:44 +0100 Message-ID: <48FE62A0.7080202@lougher.demon.co.uk> References: <81b0412b0810211529x3fc85567yc34fd369ff7c8518@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <81b0412b0810211529x3fc85567yc34fd369ff7c8518@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-embedded-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Alex Riesen Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tim.bird@am.sony.com Alex Riesen wrote: > 2008/10/17 Phillip Lougher : >> There are 16 patches in the patch set, and the patches are against the >> latest linux-next tree (linux 2.6.27-next-20081016). > > You better don't base anything off linux-next. These are not stable: there > can be even something in the tree you mentioned which will never end > up in the mainline and if your patches depend on it they wont apply to > something like v2.6.26.2. Definately, there's some d_obtain_alias stuff in linux-next which has been there since linux-2.6.27-rc4-next. I thought it would make it into the final 2.6.27 but it didn't. I thought linux-next *was* the tree that new patches should be based off. However, the relationship between linux-2.6.git, linux-next.git, and the -mm patch series seems to be a little vague to me, not to mention where the linux-staging tree fits into all this. Phillip