rebased version of wireless-testing?

rebased version of wireless-testing?

[Ben Greear]

Is there a rebased version of wireless-testing, or is there a way to
tell git to not apply any patch that was later reverted when pulling?

I'd like to pull wireless-testing changes into a tree based on linux-2.6,
but I want it clean enough to easily see what changes I actually
pulled in.

If not, I can manually pull in some patches as needed.

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

Re: rebased version of wireless-testing?

[John W. Linville]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 12:35:34PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> Is there a rebased version of wireless-testing, or is there a way to
> tell git to not apply any patch that was later reverted when pulling?
> 
> I'd like to pull wireless-testing changes into a tree based on linux-2.6,
> but I want it clean enough to easily see what changes I actually
> pulled in.
> 
> If not, I can manually pull in some patches as needed.

Don't do that -- wireless-testing is and likely always will be a mess.
It really only exists as a "-next lite" for those that only want
bleeding-edge wireless while keeping-up with linux-2.6 release
candidates.

You will be better-off pulling wireless-next-2.6 (and maybe
wireless-2.6 as well).  The history there isn't always immutable
(although I prefer it to be), but it will tend to be a lot cleaner
than wireless-testing.

John
-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com			might be all we have.  Be ready.

Re: rebased version of wireless-testing?

[Ben Greear]

On 09/24/2010 01:05 PM, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 12:35:34PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
>> Is there a rebased version of wireless-testing, or is there a way to
>> tell git to not apply any patch that was later reverted when pulling?
>>
>> I'd like to pull wireless-testing changes into a tree based on linux-2.6,
>> but I want it clean enough to easily see what changes I actually
>> pulled in.
>>
>> If not, I can manually pull in some patches as needed.
>
> Don't do that -- wireless-testing is and likely always will be a mess.
> It really only exists as a "-next lite" for those that only want
> bleeding-edge wireless while keeping-up with linux-2.6 release
> candidates.
>
> You will be better-off pulling wireless-next-2.6 (and maybe
> wireless-2.6 as well).  The history there isn't always immutable
> (although I prefer it to be), but it will tend to be a lot cleaner
> than wireless-testing.

Any chance you could push tags in wireless-next-2.6?

Thanks,
Ben

>
> John


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

Re: rebased version of wireless-testing?

[John W. Linville]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:14:30PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:

> >You will be better-off pulling wireless-next-2.6 (and maybe
> >wireless-2.6 as well).  The history there isn't always immutable
> >(although I prefer it to be), but it will tend to be a lot cleaner
> >than wireless-testing.
> 
> Any chance you could push tags in wireless-next-2.6?

Not sure what you mean -- are you not seeing the master-<date> tags?

John
-- 
John W. Linville                Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com                  might be all we have.  Be ready.

Re: rebased version of wireless-testing?

[Ben Greear]

On 09/25/2010 06:43 AM, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:14:30PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
>
>>> You will be better-off pulling wireless-next-2.6 (and maybe
>>> wireless-2.6 as well).  The history there isn't always immutable
>>> (although I prefer it to be), but it will tend to be a lot cleaner
>>> than wireless-testing.
>>
>> Any chance you could push tags in wireless-next-2.6?
>
> Not sure what you mean -- are you not seeing the master-<date>  tags?

It didn't seem like the 2.6.36-rcX tags were there..but then again, maybe
I'm looking for something that doesn't exist?

Basically, my goal is to pull in most or all of the changes from wireless-testing
into a tree based on Linus's tree (2.6.36-rc5 currently).  But, I need to keep
my tree clean enough to deal with rebasing and following Linus's tree because I have
a bunch of my own patches to add as well.

If nothing else, I'll manually pull the virtual-wifi patches that I need out of wireless-testing
and apply them to my tree.

Thanks,
Ben

>
> John


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

Re: rebased version of wireless-testing?

[John W. Linville]

On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 08:59:25AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 09/25/2010 06:43 AM, John W. Linville wrote:
> >On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:14:30PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
> >
> >>>You will be better-off pulling wireless-next-2.6 (and maybe
> >>>wireless-2.6 as well).  The history there isn't always immutable
> >>>(although I prefer it to be), but it will tend to be a lot cleaner
> >>>than wireless-testing.
> >>
> >>Any chance you could push tags in wireless-next-2.6?
> >
> >Not sure what you mean -- are you not seeing the master-<date>  tags?
> 
> It didn't seem like the 2.6.36-rcX tags were there..but then again, maybe
> I'm looking for something that doesn't exist?

Ah...well, they probably won't be in there until after 2.6.36 is
released.  I generally don't pull from Linus into that tree during
the release cycle in order to avoid surprising Dave when he pulls it.
But if you are basing on linux-2.6 then you should already have those
tags anyway?

John
-- 
John W. Linville		Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@tuxdriver.com			might be all we have.  Be ready.

Re: rebased version of wireless-testing?

[Ben Greear]

On 09/27/2010 08:02 AM, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 08:59:25AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
>> On 09/25/2010 06:43 AM, John W. Linville wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:14:30PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
>>>
>>>>> You will be better-off pulling wireless-next-2.6 (and maybe
>>>>> wireless-2.6 as well).  The history there isn't always immutable
>>>>> (although I prefer it to be), but it will tend to be a lot cleaner
>>>>> than wireless-testing.
>>>>
>>>> Any chance you could push tags in wireless-next-2.6?
>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean -- are you not seeing the master-<date>   tags?
>>
>> It didn't seem like the 2.6.36-rcX tags were there..but then again, maybe
>> I'm looking for something that doesn't exist?
>
> Ah...well, they probably won't be in there until after 2.6.36 is
> released.  I generally don't pull from Linus into that tree during
> the release cycle in order to avoid surprising Dave when he pulls it.
> But if you are basing on linux-2.6 then you should already have those
> tags anyway?

I was going to run some diffs in wt against 2.6.36-rc5 to try to figure out
the changes I needed to pull in.

A straight pull of wt into 2.6.36-rc5 didn't work well for me, and it
appeared a rebase was going to be even worse.

So, I'm going to try manually applying patches...after I make another
stab at getting the ath5k virtual AP/STA patch acceptable.

Thanks,
Ben

>
> John


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com