which tree should I generate the ext4 patch ?

which tree should I generate the ext4 patch ?

[coly]

Hi, list

These days, I am tring to post my patch for inode reservation on
linux-ext4. But I am confused on which tree I should generate the patch.

I worked on mm-tree. But now Thoedore creates a tree for ext4, so should
I generate the patch based on tso-tree ?

Same question to e2fsprogs. I guess maybe I should generate the patch
for e2fsprogs based on e2fsprogs-TEST branch, a.k.a 1.40-WIP-0407. Isn't
it ?

This information has to be confirmed for me to generate the patch.
Thanks for anyone replys me :-)


Best regards.

Coly

Re: which tree should I generate the ext4 patch ?

[Theodore Tso]

On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 05:00:43PM +0800, coly wrote:
> 
> These days, I am tring to post my patch for inode reservation on
> linux-ext4. But I am confused on which tree I should generate the patch.
> 
> I worked on mm-tree. But now Thoedore creates a tree for ext4, so should
> I generate the patch based on tso-tree ?

The mm-tree is fed from the ext4 patch series, so there shouldn't be
much difference.

> Same question to e2fsprogs. I guess maybe I should generate the patch
> for e2fsprogs based on e2fsprogs-TEST branch, a.k.a 1.40-WIP-0407. Isn't
> it ?

Yes, or if you want to use the very latest, you can use the Mercurial
repository located at:

	http://thunk.org/hg/e2fsprogs

I will be switch to git at some point in the near future, probably
after the e2fsprogs 1.40 release, but for now that's the place to get
the very latest.  

In practice, it's not hard to rebase patches, but patches against the
more recent versions are definitely appreciated.  So if you're not
familiar with using Mercurial, please feel free to use the
1.40-WIP-0407 as the base for your patches.  

Regards, 

					- Ted

Re: which tree should I generate the ext4 patch ?

[coly]

Theodore,

Thanks for your kindly replying.

Coly

在 2007-05-23三的 08:17 -0400，Theodore Tso写道：
> Mercurial

Re: which tree should I generate the ext4 patch ?

[coly]

Theodore,

I can see all the files, but how can I download the files by cvs ? I
tried pserver, but it seems does not work ..

could you give me some hints ?

Thanks

Coly

在 2007-05-23三的 08:17 -0400，Theodore Tso写道：
> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 05:00:43PM +0800, coly wrote:
> > 
> > These days, I am tring to post my patch for inode reservation on
> > linux-ext4. But I am confused on which tree I should generate the patch.
> > 
> > I worked on mm-tree. But now Thoedore creates a tree for ext4, so should
> > I generate the patch based on tso-tree ?
> 
> The mm-tree is fed from the ext4 patch series, so there shouldn't be
> much difference.
> 
> > Same question to e2fsprogs. I guess maybe I should generate the patch
> > for e2fsprogs based on e2fsprogs-TEST branch, a.k.a 1.40-WIP-0407. Isn't
> > it ?
> 
> Yes, or if you want to use the very latest, you can use the Mercurial
> repository located at:
> 
> 	http://thunk.org/hg/e2fsprogs
> 
> I will be switch to git at some point in the near future, probably
> after the e2fsprogs 1.40 release, but for now that's the place to get
> the very latest.  
> 
> In practice, it's not hard to rebase patches, but patches against the
> more recent versions are definitely appreciated.  So if you're not
> familiar with using Mercurial, please feel free to use the
> 1.40-WIP-0407 as the base for your patches.  
> 
> Regards, 
> 
> 					- Ted

Re: which tree should I generate the ext4 patch ?

[Aneesh Kumar K.V]

coly wrote:
> Theodore,
> 
> I can see all the files, but how can I download the files by cvs ? I
> tried pserver, but it seems does not work ..
> 
> could you give me some hints ?
> 
> 



hg clone http://thunk.org/hg/e2fsprogs/


hg come in mercurial package.

-aneesh