From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:28:54 -0700 From: Matt Porter To: Jon Masters Cc: linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: 4xx ports Message-ID: <20031114082854.A23689@home.com> References: <3FB4D07C.4010909@jonmasters.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <3FB4D07C.4010909@jonmasters.org>; from jonathan@jonmasters.org on Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 12:54:20PM +0000 Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 12:54:20PM +0000, Jon Masters wrote: > > > Hi there, > > Several people seem to think I was after advice on a port to use or > asking for help doing one etc. > > For the record I am not in this current thread of conversation asking > for those things but I am trying to find out how we can get the stock > official kernel distributed by kernel.org to reflect some of the changes > which have been made. Post patches versus the BK linux-2.4 tree here so they can be discussed. If they are suitable for merging upstream (Paul is happy) then they will be moved into the for-marcelo-ppc tree. This is a slow process unless the changes are straightforward bug fixes or cleanups. Merging patches into linuxppc-2.4 is much quicker and allows a wider audience to test significant changes to help determine if they are suitable to go upstream. Stuff will get merged from linuxppc-2.4 upstream over time. -Matt ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/