From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:04:28 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Paul Mackerras Cc: Sven Luther , linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: linuxppc trees, what is going on ? Message-ID: <20040113170428.GC10912@stop.crashing.org> References: <20040110084155.GA19817@iliana> <16385.63143.132872.395486@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <16385.63143.132872.395486@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 12:21:43PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote: > > Sven Luther writes: > > > Last year, there was linuxppc_2_4 and the -benh tree. But since december > > 24, this tree doesn't seem to be touched anymore, and a new linuxppc-2.4 > > tree is used. > > The linuxppc_2_4* trees were set up before Marcelo moved over to using > BitKeeper to maintain his 2.4 tree. As such, the linuxppc_2_4* trees > are not descendents of Marcelo's tree, according to BK, and are > updated by applying patches to the linux_2_4 tree, which then get > pulled from there into linuxppc_2_4, and from there into > linuxppc_2_4_devel and linuxppc_2_4_benh. > > Now that Marcelo is using BK, this process means extra unnecessary > work. Also, there are problems in those trees that have accumulated > over the years and that can't be solved in any simple way - there are > tag conflicts which keep popping up, and files have been renamed, > which gets confusing when changes made upstream to > arch/ppc/boot/Makefile get applied by BK to > arch/ppc/boot/prep/Makefile in the linuxppc_2_4 tree, since BK thinks > they are the same file. > > The linuxppc-2.4 tree is a descendent of Marcelo's tree, and as such > we can pull changes that Marcelo makes in his tree directly into the > linuxppc-2.4 tree. > > > Are we supposed to move to the linuxppc-2.4 tree, and if so, what is > > the rationale behind this change. > > The idea of the linuxppc-2.4 tree is that it would stay closer to > Marcelo's tree, which would make my job in sending updates to Marcelo > easier. > > In fact, for any substantial body of work which you want to have me > send to Marcelo, the best thing is to create a clone of Marcelo's > linux-2.4 tree, check your changes into that, and make it available > for me to pull from. I can then pull from that and push the > changeset(s) into the tree that Marcelo pulls from. That tree can > then also be pulled into the linuxppc-2.4 tree to make the changes > available there before Marcelo pulls them. > > > Furthermore, 2.4.24 was released, and the linuxppc-2.4 now contains > > TAG: v2.4.24, and a bit later there is a Changeset marked as "Import > > 2.4.24 final tree". There used to be TAGS like TAG: v2.4.23_linuxppc_2_4 > > which i used to take snapshots for releasing debian powerpc kernel > > packages. Will there still be those, did they simply get forgotten, > > should i sync with the v2.4.24 tags, or am i missing something. > > 2.4.24 was a bit strange. Marcelo was doing the 2.4.24-pre series as > usual, but then released a 2.4.24 final with just a few changes from > 2.4.23, and transferred all the changes that he had been accumulating > in 2.4.24-pre into 2.4.25-pre. The linuxppc_2_4* trees haven't been > updated to reflect that yet. FWIW, I'm leaning towards _not_ moving the linuxppc_2_4* and related trees past where they are not just becaue I have this feeling that because of what Marcelo did, it'll be an even larger headache than normal. OTOH, we could just skip 2.4.24 final and move from 2.4.24-pre3 to 2.4.25-pre5 (w/ the mremap fix tossed in). -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/