From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao06.cox.net (fed1rmmtao06.cox.net [68.230.241.33]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 205BB2BC0F for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:08:08 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:08:05 -0700 From: Matt Porter To: "Lawrence E. Bakst" , linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org Message-ID: <20041020100805.A14270@home.com> References: <20041020161148.GA17445@gate.ebshome.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20041020161148.GA17445@gate.ebshome.net>; from ebs@ebshome.net on Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 09:11:48AM -0700 Cc: Subject: Re: Is linux-2.5-ocp the current 2.6 4xx code base List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 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 Linux-2.5-ocp is obsolete.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