From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:60748 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751230Ab0G0QPM (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:15:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:04:34 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: linux-wireless Subject: Re: Confused - bisecting wireless-testing Message-ID: <20100727160434.GB31694@tuxdriver.com> References: <20100727140139.GA31694@tuxdriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 08:56:54AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 7:01 AM, John W. Linville > wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 08:27:06PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> 04:23  * mcgrof is confused, I just did a git bisect -i on > >> wireless-testing on some patch on Fri Jul 2 00:09:49 2010  and ended > >> up with a 2.6.34 top level > >>           Makefile > >> 04:23 < mcgrof> it was git rebase -i ba17bc5e55ba541d2a8765fca53b6883b667ab21 > >> 04:23 < mcgrof> eh > >> 04:24 < mcgrof> how am I supposed to bisect wl now > >> 04:24 < mcgrof> the odd thing though is that the top commit is ancient > >> 04:24 < mcgrof> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/242077/ > >> 04:24 < mcgrof> but the other ones are OK > >> > >> I realize we should use wireless-2.6.git to bisect stable but I need > >> to bisect against recent patches that spans different master- tags > >> from you, I figured git bisecting wireless-testing would work now that > >> you are using a different method to move your tree forward but am I > >> wrong? Should I only bisect between master tags still? > > > > wireless-testing is a nasty mess when it comes to bisection. > > I am considering a one-time rebase of wireless-testing after the > > next -rc1, now that the current process is working reasonably well. > > wireless-testing will continue to have a messy history, but it should > > be a bit less nasty after a rebase. > > > > As for right now, it sounds like you should just use wireless-next-2.6 > > instead? > > Oh OK, didn't realize that was bisectable, thanks. Also was unsure if > I'd get other subsystems's -next components. Is wireless-next.git just > the -next bits for 802.11 or does it also suck up net-next? Usually just the wireless bits, but I did just pull the bluetooth stuff (which included some net-next stuff). John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.