From: "Amit D. Chaudhary" <amitc@brocade.com>
To: linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: Status of 440GP port
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 16:08:46 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CAA480E.1050304@brocade.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3CAA3EEA.D844E7AB@mvista.com
Hi,
After listening to the email thread so far, I have a rather simple
question, is there any difference current or planned between the bk
repositories?
linuxppc_2_4: the stable branch
linuxppc_2_4_devel: the stable branch testing tree
both seem to be based on 2.4.19-pre4.
Thanks
Amit
Frank Rowand wrote:
> andrew may wrote:
>
>
> < taken totally out of context >
>
>>I would expect a development tree to contain non-working and non-tested
>>stuff. It becomes very help full to see things that get tried but don't
>>work in the history of a file. It makes a lot more sense to use the version
>>history to document quirks in hardware than to start putting comments in the
>>source on what does and doesn't work.
>>
>
> The version history does not seem to me a useful place to document quirks in
> hardware. The history is usually full of so much trivia that it is hard to
> search. The history also usually doesn't include much in the way of useful
> information. It seems to me that either the source, or the Documentation
> directory is a good place to document quirks in hardware.
>
> -Frank
> --
> Frank Rowand <frank_rowand@mvista.com>
> MontaVista Software, Inc
>
>
>
>
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-04-03 0:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-04-02 19:46 Status of 440GP port Eugene Surovegin
2002-04-02 21:18 ` Matt Porter
2002-04-02 21:41 ` andrew may
2002-04-02 22:21 ` Matt Porter
2002-04-02 22:54 ` andrew may
2002-04-02 23:20 ` Matt Porter
2002-04-03 0:28 ` andrew may
2002-04-02 23:29 ` Frank Rowand
2002-04-03 0:08 ` Amit D. Chaudhary [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3CAA480E.1050304@brocade.com \
--to=amitc@brocade.com \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).