From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:32:03 +0100 (BST) Received: from lug-owl.de ([IPv6:::ffff:195.71.106.12]:47800 "EHLO lug-owl.de") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 09:31:48 +0100 Received: by lug-owl.de (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 9AF0A1901BB; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:31:47 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:31:47 +0200 From: Jan-Benedict Glaw To: linux-mips@linux-mips.org Cc: moreau francis Subject: Re: How to keep uptodate a mips-linux port Message-ID: <20050401083147.GQ21175@lug-owl.de> Mail-Followup-To: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, moreau francis References: <20050401075417.14596.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6zipuvUKAEymKn2g" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050401075417.14596.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> X-Operating-System: Linux mail 2.6.10-rc2-bk5lug-owl X-gpg-fingerprint: 250D 3BCF 7127 0D8C A444 A961 1DBD 5E75 8399 E1BB X-gpg-key: wwwkeys.de.pgp.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 7564 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: jbglaw@lug-owl.de Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips --6zipuvUKAEymKn2g Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2005-04-01 09:54:17 +0200, moreau francis wrote in message <20050401075417.14596.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>: > --- Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > > The best approach is to cleanly break out all your > > changes into > > semantical patches and submit them to the prople who > > care about the > > individual files. The MIPS-specific patches go to > > this list. >=20 > I already tried this one, and it doens't seem to be > the best one: I sent a patch a couple of months ago > to the list, but I didn't get any answers...so I beg > for Ralf to look at it on IRC, but he seems to have=20 > not time for it...So now I'm trying to find out a new > approach.... Don't expect that sending a patch once always leads to it's prompt acceptance. Pushing a patch *can* involve resending it multiple times, over a long period of time. However, if a patch is in acceptable state (that is, a half-way readable coding style, no superfluous debugging output, ...), Ralf usually takes it quite fast. > Futhermore, this solution can take several months > before every patches have been submitted and accepted. > During this while I'll need to be synchronised with > CVS tree. That isn't all that easy, especially with CVS and especially if you want to keep patches in nicely separated changesets. With CVS, this unfortunately involves some manual work, or clever scripting. But SCM systems are a totally different topic. "quilt" may work for you, though. (And yes, we all search for the solution[tm] to SCM. RFC 1925 comes to mind, modified to "Easy to use, technically working and politically correct: Pick any two (you can't have all three)." ) MfG, JBG --=20 Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481 = _ O _ "Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg = _ _ O fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier B=C3=BCrger" | im Internet! | im Ira= k! O O O ret =3D do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA)= ); --6zipuvUKAEymKn2g Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCTQbzHb1edYOZ4bsRAoc0AJ95ceZcwpi9b9IWZecz1UeHmob/8QCfVpAx oc12V7cOTvs/bOBqHX3XD10= =cM6M -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6zipuvUKAEymKn2g--