From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Buttchereit, Axel (XL)" Subject: patch-scripts, CVS, bitkeeper and kernel-sources Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 00:33:15 +0100 Message-ID: <41FEC03B.1070401@XLsigned.net> Reply-To: linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1Cvl2q-0007Ry-G8 for linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:33:24 -0800 Received: from mail.goracer.de ([62.75.192.134]) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with smtp (Exim 4.41) id 1Cvl2n-0006xC-Do for linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:33:24 -0800 Sender: linux-fbdev-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: linux-fbdev-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: linux-fbdev-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Hi, after reading "docco.txt" of "patch-scripts", browsing the mailing list archive and inspecting the "linux-fbdev" CVS repository on soureforge I'm a little confused. Where are the sources or rather how can I access the HEAD revision (of trunk, tags and/or branches) that are required when generating a patch? My intelfb-patch is based on 2.6.10 kernel sources that might have been patched already by gentoo (gentoo 2.6.10-r6), though I'm quite sure that "intelfb" was'nt touched. But 2.6.11-rc2-mm2 on kernel.org does obviously contain patches for "intelfb" that I wasn't aware of. (Maybe the patches that were recently posted here) Does that mean that I have to check "kernel.org" for latest patches (change sets)? What for is this (almost empty) "linux-fbdev" CVS repository? My first thought was that this is the place where current fbdev development is taken place and that "stable releases" are transmitted to "kernel.org". Right now I'm assuming that the truth is: I have to maintain a kernel-source-tree by my own and use the (quoting) "fragile" patch-scripts to apply bitkeeper diffs from kernel.org? Is this all because of linux using bitkeeper and not cvs, gnu/arch (tla) or subversion? Thanks for answering my stupid questions --Axel ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl