* Is linux-2.5-ocp the current 2.6 4xx code base
@ 2004-10-20 8:02 Lawrence E. Bakst
2004-10-20 16:11 ` Eugene Surovegin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Lawrence E. Bakst @ 2004-10-20 8:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-embedded
At 4:23 PM -0700 5/14/04, Matt Porter wrote:
>There is a tree, bk://source.mvista.com/linux-2.5-ocp, that has most
>4xx boards working, but it's 2.6.5. The core 4xx support is moving into
>current 2.6, but it will be a little bit longer until important drivers
>like EMAC and IIC are merged into the stock kernel.
Is the linux-2.5-ocp tree still the right place to get 2.6 4xx code or has that code been moved upstream or someplace else?
To be more specific which tree to a "bk clone" to get the latest stuff for 4xx.
Best,
leb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Is linux-2.5-ocp the current 2.6 4xx code base
2004-10-20 8:02 Is linux-2.5-ocp the current 2.6 4xx code base Lawrence E. Bakst
@ 2004-10-20 16:11 ` Eugene Surovegin
2004-10-20 17:08 ` Matt Porter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Eugene Surovegin @ 2004-10-20 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lawrence E. Bakst; +Cc: linuxppc-embedded
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 01:02:21AM -0700, Lawrence E. Bakst wrote:
> At 4:23 PM -0700 5/14/04, Matt Porter wrote:
> >There is a tree, bk://source.mvista.com/linux-2.5-ocp, that has most
> >4xx boards working, but it's 2.6.5. The core 4xx support is moving into
> >current 2.6, but it will be a little bit longer until important drivers
> >like EMAC and IIC are merged into the stock kernel.
>
> Is the linux-2.5-ocp tree still the right place to get 2.6 4xx code or has that code been moved upstream or someplace else?
Linux-2.5-ocp is obsolete.
> To be more specific which tree to a "bk clone" to get the latest stuff for 4xx.
Use kernel.org's BK tree: bk://linux.bkbits.net/linux-2.5
--
Eugene
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Is linux-2.5-ocp the current 2.6 4xx code base
2004-10-20 16:11 ` Eugene Surovegin
@ 2004-10-20 17:08 ` Matt Porter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Matt Porter @ 2004-10-20 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lawrence E. Bakst, linuxppc-embedded
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 09:11:48AM -0700, Eugene Surovegin wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 01:02:21AM -0700, Lawrence E. Bakst wrote:
> > At 4:23 PM -0700 5/14/04, Matt Porter wrote:
> > >There is a tree, bk://source.mvista.com/linux-2.5-ocp, that has most
> > >4xx boards working, but it's 2.6.5. The core 4xx support is moving into
> > >current 2.6, but it will be a little bit longer until important drivers
> > >like EMAC and IIC are merged into the stock kernel.
> >
> > Is the linux-2.5-ocp tree still the right place to get 2.6 4xx code or has that code been moved upstream or someplace else?
>
> Linux-2.5-ocp is obsolete.
>
> > To be more specific which tree to a "bk clone" to get the latest stuff for 4xx.
>
> Use kernel.org's BK tree: bk://linux.bkbits.net/linux-2.5
Oh my, I really should have killed off the old tree.
--
Matt Porter
mporter@kernel.crashing.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-10-20 17:08 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-10-20 8:02 Is linux-2.5-ocp the current 2.6 4xx code base Lawrence E. Bakst
2004-10-20 16:11 ` Eugene Surovegin
2004-10-20 17:08 ` Matt Porter
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).