linux-next: first tree

linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1556 bytes --]

Hi all,

I have created the first cut of the linux-next tree at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git.

Things to know about this tree:

It has two branches - master and stable.  Stable is currently just Linus'
tree and will never rebase.  Master will rebase on an almost daily basis
(maybe slower at the start).

The tree consists of subsystem git and quilt trees.  Currently, the quilt
trees are integrated by importing them into appropriately based git
branches and then merging those branches.  This has the advantage that
any conflict resolution will onlt have to happen once at the merge point
rather than, possibly, sevveral times during the series.  However, I am
considering just applying the quilt trees on top of the current tree
to get a result more like Linus' tree - we will see. The git trees are
obviously just merged.

Between each merge, the tree was built with both an allmodconfig for both
powerpc and x86_64.

The tree currently contains:
	Greg's driver-core, pci and usb quilt series (in that order)
	Alasdair Kergon's device-mapper quilt tree
	Jiri Kosina's hid git tree
	Jean Delvare's i2c quilt tree
	Randy Dunlap's kernel-doc quilt tree
	Haavard Skinnemoen's avr32 git tree

There was only one unresolved conflict which could have been caused
because I was not sure where to base the kernel-doc tree.

So, comments, please.

Also, more trees please ... :-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Jiri Kosina]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> The tree consists of subsystem git and quilt trees.  Currently, the 
> quilt trees are integrated by importing them into appropriately based 
> git branches and then merging those branches.  

Now, would it be possible to have somewhere listed the URLs of git/quilt 
trees that were merged? The commit messages about merges with different 
branches aren't too informative, it might sometime be useful to know more 
about the trees that were merged.

Maybe just an additional file somewhere in the root of the source tree 
would be sufficient ...

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 920 bytes --]

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:06:28 +0100 (CET) Jiri Kosina <jikos@jikos.cz> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
> > The tree consists of subsystem git and quilt trees.  Currently, the 
> > quilt trees are integrated by importing them into appropriately based 
> > git branches and then merging those branches.  
> 
> Now, would it be possible to have somewhere listed the URLs of git/quilt 
> trees that were merged? The commit messages about merges with different 
> branches aren't too informative, it might sometime be useful to know more 
> about the trees that were merged.
> 
> Maybe just an additional file somewhere in the root of the source tree 
> would be sufficient ...

Good idea.  I have pushed out an extra commit that just contains the top
level "Trees" file.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, 14 of February 2008, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I have created the first cut of the linux-next tree at
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git.
> 
> Things to know about this tree:
> 
> It has two branches - master and stable.  Stable is currently just Linus'
> tree and will never rebase.  Master will rebase on an almost daily basis
> (maybe slower at the start).
> 
> The tree consists of subsystem git and quilt trees.  Currently, the quilt
> trees are integrated by importing them into appropriately based git
> branches and then merging those branches.  This has the advantage that
> any conflict resolution will onlt have to happen once at the merge point
> rather than, possibly, sevveral times during the series.  However, I am
> considering just applying the quilt trees on top of the current tree
> to get a result more like Linus' tree - we will see. The git trees are
> obviously just merged.
> 
> Between each merge, the tree was built with both an allmodconfig for both
> powerpc and x86_64.
> 
> The tree currently contains:
> 	Greg's driver-core, pci and usb quilt series (in that order)
> 	Alasdair Kergon's device-mapper quilt tree
> 	Jiri Kosina's hid git tree
> 	Jean Delvare's i2c quilt tree
> 	Randy Dunlap's kernel-doc quilt tree
> 	Haavard Skinnemoen's avr32 git tree
> 
> There was only one unresolved conflict which could have been caused
> because I was not sure where to base the kernel-doc tree.
> 
> So, comments, please.
> 
> Also, more trees please ... :-)

Perhaps you can add:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6 test

Thanks,
Rafael

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 554 bytes --]

Hi Rafael,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:45:55 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
>
> Perhaps you can add:
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6 test

I would prefer that the trees be added by the subsystem maintainers and
they can tell me which branch represents their expectations for the next
kernel release (in this case 2.6.26). But thanks, hopefully you will have
prodded them along. :-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Martin Schwidefsky]

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 02:00 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> I would prefer that the trees be added by the subsystem maintainers and
> they can tell me which branch represents their expectations for the next
> kernel release (in this case 2.6.26). But thanks, hopefully you will have
> prodded them along. :-)

For the s390 architecture please use the "features" branch of git390:

git://git390.osdl.marist.edu/pub/scm/linux-2.6.git features

-- 
blue skies,
  Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 370 bytes --]

Hi Martin,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:25:09 +0100 Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> For the s390 architecture please use the "features" branch of git390:
> 
> git://git390.osdl.marist.edu/pub/scm/linux-2.6.git features

Added thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Paul Mundt]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 02:00:19AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:45:55 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps you can add:
> > 
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6 test
> 
> I would prefer that the trees be added by the subsystem maintainers and
> they can tell me which branch represents their expectations for the next
> kernel release (in this case 2.6.26). But thanks, hopefully you will have
> prodded them along. :-)
> 
For SH:

	master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lethal/sh-2.6.git

This is also what goes in to -mm.

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 299 bytes --]

Hi Paul,

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:49:28 +0900 Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> wrote:
>
> For SH:
> 
> 	master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lethal/sh-2.6.git

Added, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Dave Kleikamp]

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 02:00 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> I would prefer that the trees be added by the subsystem maintainers and
> they can tell me which branch represents their expectations for the next
> kernel release (in this case 2.6.26). But thanks, hopefully you will have
> prodded them along. :-)

Please add:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shaggy/jfs-2.6.git next

Thanks,
Shaggy
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 315 bytes --]

Hi Dave,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:54:02 -0600 Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Please add:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shaggy/jfs-2.6.git next

Added, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Len Brown]

On Thursday 14 February 2008 10:00, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:45:55 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps you can add:
> > 
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6 test
> 
> I would prefer that the trees be added by the subsystem maintainers and
> they can tell me which branch represents their expectations for the next
> kernel release (in this case 2.6.26). But thanks, hopefully you will have
> prodded them along. :-)

Rafael has it right, please add the branch above.
It will include both the upcoming ACPI and suspend patches.

Note that I reserve the right to re-base it from time to time -
so when you pull it, you want to pull it onto a new branch vs. Linux
rather than onto a previous copy of itself.

thanks,
-Len

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 572 bytes --]

Hi Len,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:58:38 -0500 Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Rafael has it right, please add the branch above.
> It will include both the upcoming ACPI and suspend patches.

Added, thanks, with you as contact.

> Note that I reserve the right to re-base it from time to time -
> so when you pull it, you want to pull it onto a new branch vs. Linux
> rather than onto a previous copy of itself.

That is fine, I expect rebases.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Andy Whitcroft]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:37AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I have created the first cut of the linux-next tree at
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git.
> 
> Things to know about this tree:
> 
> It has two branches - master and stable.  Stable is currently just Linus'
> tree and will never rebase.  Master will rebase on an almost daily basis
> (maybe slower at the start).

As devout believers in testing things early we test -mm and -git releases
as they drop.  I am keen that we are able to continue this with the -next
tree once it gets going.  Having just pulled this tree its not obvious how
I would communicate which tree I had tested.  I guess we could use the
SHA1 of the actual head used, but that really is cumbersome for the poor
people who have to check the results and actually report things to lkml.

As I previously indicated (on my stupidly subjected "testing linux-next")
to make it simple for us to test these releases, and for the reporters to
have a clear way to refer to them, we need some kind of sensible handle
for each.  It is also very desirable that it be trivial for a script to
detect releases.  The -git series is pretty handily named, following that
example might make sense.

I was going to propose you name them in a similar way to the main -gitN
releases.  But, I note that you are merging with what appears to be an up to
date Linus master tree.  Which means there is no nice name for the real
base point for your merges anyhow.

I guess there are a couple of sensible names for these.  Either a simple
date or using the nearest sane tag.

So either:
	next-20080214
or:
	v2.6.25-rc1-next1

Where the "base" version would be determinable from:
	apw@pinky$ git describe --tags origin/stable
	v2.6.25-rc1-120-ge760e71

I am guessing if a maintainer is coming back to look at a failure
reported by yourself, they are also going to want to know what the base
was for the merge which failed.  So it may make sense to keep a tag for
that too?

Also will you be producing any tarballs for these releases?  If so I
would say they would definatly need to be against some common base, like
against the nearest official tag "below".

-apw

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1052 bytes --]

Hi Andy,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:04:36 +0000 Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org> wrote:
>
> As devout believers in testing things early we test -mm and -git releases
> as they drop.  I am keen that we are able to continue this with the -next
> tree once it gets going.  Having just pulled this tree its not obvious how
> I would communicate which tree I had tested.  I guess we could use the
> SHA1 of the actual head used, but that really is cumbersome for the poor
> people who have to check the results and actually report things to lkml.

I hope I have addressed this issue by tagging each tree with its date
i.e. todays was next-20080220.

> Also will you be producing any tarballs for these releases?  If so I
> would say they would definatly need to be against some common base, like
> against the nearest official tag "below".

I hadn't considered tarballs, but I will give it some thought.

Thanks for your thoughts.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Randy Dunlap]

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 01:23:32 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi Andy,
> 
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:04:36 +0000 Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org> wrote:
> >
> > As devout believers in testing things early we test -mm and -git releases
> > as they drop.  I am keen that we are able to continue this with the -next
> > tree once it gets going.  Having just pulled this tree its not obvious how
> > I would communicate which tree I had tested.  I guess we could use the
> > SHA1 of the actual head used, but that really is cumbersome for the poor
> > people who have to check the results and actually report things to lkml.
> 
> I hope I have addressed this issue by tagging each tree with its date
> i.e. todays was next-20080220.
> 
> > Also will you be producing any tarballs for these releases?  If so I
> > would say they would definatly need to be against some common base, like
> > against the nearest official tag "below".
> 
> I hadn't considered tarballs, but I will give it some thought.

I'd like to see tarballs too, please...

---
~Randy

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Frank Seidel]

Randy Dunlap wrote:
> I'd like to see tarballs too, please...

Hi, i'll provide tars of the current linux-next tree reachable
via my http://linux-next.f-seidel.de wiki ("Tar Downloads").
Is that what you were looking for?

Thanks,
Frank

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Randy Dunlap]

Frank Seidel wrote:
> Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> I'd like to see tarballs too, please...
> 
> Hi, i'll provide tars of the current linux-next tree reachable
> via my http://linux-next.f-seidel.de wiki ("Tar Downloads").
> Is that what you were looking for?

Looks close.  It needs to be scriptable (not just a dynamically generated
link) and have predictable names.  As long as those are true, then it
should be great.

Thanks.
-- 
~Randy

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Harvey Harrison]

On Thu, 2008-02-21 at 16:12 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Frank Seidel wrote:
> > Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >> I'd like to see tarballs too, please...
> > 
> > Hi, i'll provide tars of the current linux-next tree reachable
> > via my http://linux-next.f-seidel.de wiki ("Tar Downloads").
> > Is that what you were looking for?
> 
> Looks close.  It needs to be scriptable (not just a dynamically generated
> link) and have predictable names.  As long as those are true, then it
> should be great.
> 



// add the next git repo as a tracked remote
git remote add next git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git
// fetch any objects you don't have
// run this whenever you want to check for more objects
git remote update
// produce a tarball of the tree tagged next-20080220
git archive --format=tar next-20080220 > next-20080220.tar

Cheers,

Harvey

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Frank Seidel]

Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Looks close.  It needs to be scriptable (not just a dynamically generated
> link) and have predictable names.  As long as those are true, then it
> should be great.

Yes, i would have scripted it when it tourned out to be of use for others.
But as i just saw Stephen already has something ready for this :-)

Thanks,
Frank

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Greg KH]

On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 01:07:01AM +0100, Frank Seidel wrote:
> Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > I'd like to see tarballs too, please...
> 
> Hi, i'll provide tars of the current linux-next tree reachable
> via my http://linux-next.f-seidel.de wiki ("Tar Downloads").
> Is that what you were looking for?

Any reason we can't get these on kernel.org so that the mirror system
will kick in for the whole world?

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Frank Seidel]

Greg KH wrote:
> Any reason we can't get these on kernel.org so that the mirror system
> will kick in for the whole world?

Only that i don't have a kernel.org account ;-) But Stephen has and
i suppose he'll put it there.

Thanks,
Frank

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 570 bytes --]

Hi Frank,

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 01:07:01 +0100 Frank Seidel <fseidel@suse.de> wrote:
>
> Hi, i'll provide tars of the current linux-next tree reachable
> via my http://linux-next.f-seidel.de wiki ("Tar Downloads").
> Is that what you were looking for?

I was going to start providing tarballs yesterday, but other things
happened :-( I will provide a next-YYYYMMDD.tar.gz file on kernel.org
starting today.  I will mention it in today's announcement.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Frank Seidel]

Hello Stephen,

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 01:07:01 +0100 Frank Seidel <fseidel@suse.de> wrote:
>> Hi, i'll provide tars of the current linux-next tree reachable
>> via my http://linux-next.f-seidel.de wiki ("Tar Downloads").
>> Is that what you were looking for?
> 
> I was going to start providing tarballs yesterday, but other things
> happened :-( I will provide a next-YYYYMMDD.tar.gz file on kernel.org
> starting today.  I will mention it in today's announcement.

sorry, i didn't knew/considered you could have something prepared for this
as well, as i couldn't see any feedback from you to this request for quite
some time.
So, i just thought i could try to take care of this point. But of course
its much more handy when you just do it together when releasing a new
linux-next.

Thanks,
Frank

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1223 bytes --]

Hi Frank,

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 06:41:00 +0100 Frank Seidel <fseidel@suse.de> wrote:
>
> Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 01:07:01 +0100 Frank Seidel <fseidel@suse.de> wrote:
> >> Hi, i'll provide tars of the current linux-next tree reachable
> >> via my http://linux-next.f-seidel.de wiki ("Tar Downloads").
> >> Is that what you were looking for?
> > 
> > I was going to start providing tarballs yesterday, but other things
> > happened :-( I will provide a next-YYYYMMDD.tar.gz file on kernel.org
> > starting today.  I will mention it in today's announcement.
> 
> sorry, i didn't knew/considered you could have something prepared for this
> as well, as i couldn't see any feedback from you to this request for quite
> some time.

Yeah, sorry, but the last few days have been a bit hectic ... should be
better from now on, I hope.  Don't be sorry - I like enthusiasm.

> So, i just thought i could try to take care of this point. But of course
> its much more handy when you just do it together when releasing a new
> linux-next.

I can easily generate them straight out of the tree on master.kernel.org.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

> The tree currently contains:
> 	Greg's driver-core, pci and usb quilt series (in that order)
> 	Alasdair Kergon's device-mapper quilt tree
> 	Jiri Kosina's hid git tree
> 	Jean Delvare's i2c quilt tree
> 	Randy Dunlap's kernel-doc quilt tree
> 	Haavard Skinnemoen's avr32 git tree

Please add v4l-dvb tree, at:

ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mchehab/linux-next.git

The above tree has two branches: 'master' and 'stable'

Both branches will have V4L/DVB next patches. The first is against your master,
and the second, against your stable.

I've opted to have both trees, since probably 'stable' is the better option for
you to clone. On the other hand, 'master' allow me to foresee if an "alien"
patch would conflict with a subsystem patch.

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 899 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:38:50 -0200 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> Please add v4l-dvb tree, at:
> 
> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mchehab/linux-next.git
> 
> The above tree has two branches: 'master' and 'stable'
> 
> Both branches will have V4L/DVB next patches. The first is against your master,
> and the second, against your stable.
> 
> I've opted to have both trees, since probably 'stable' is the better option for
> you to clone. On the other hand, 'master' allow me to foresee if an "alien"
> patch would conflict with a subsystem patch.

OK, this looks good (I should read ahead in my email before
replying :-)).  I will fetch the stable branch of this tree instead of
the previous tree you sent me, OK?

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:24:14 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Mauro,
> 
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:38:50 -0200 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > Please add v4l-dvb tree, at:
> > 
> > ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mchehab/linux-next.git
> > 
> > The above tree has two branches: 'master' and 'stable'
> > 
> > Both branches will have V4L/DVB next patches. The first is against your master,
> > and the second, against your stable.
> > 
> > I've opted to have both trees, since probably 'stable' is the better option for
> > you to clone. On the other hand, 'master' allow me to foresee if an "alien"
> > patch would conflict with a subsystem patch.
> 
> OK, this looks good (I should read ahead in my email before
> replying :-)).  I will fetch the stable branch of this tree instead of
> the previous tree you sent me, OK?

OK.

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Yinghai Lu]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 5:35 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>  I have created the first cut of the linux-next tree at
>  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git.
>
>  Things to know about this tree:
>
>  It has two branches - master and stable.  Stable is currently just Linus'
>  tree and will never rebase.  Master will rebase on an almost daily basis
>  (maybe slower at the start).

can you make stable rebase too?

so we make git-bisect working by fold in some obvious bug fix.

or that is linux-stable tree?

YH

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Benny Halevy]

On Feb. 14, 2008, 20:29 +0200, "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 5:35 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>>  I have created the first cut of the linux-next tree at
>>  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git.
>>
>>  Things to know about this tree:
>>
>>  It has two branches - master and stable.  Stable is currently just Linus'
>>  tree and will never rebase.  Master will rebase on an almost daily basis
>>  (maybe slower at the start).
> 
> can you make stable rebase too?

The point is that if you rebase it it's no longer stable.

Benny

> 
> so we make git-bisect working by fold in some obvious bug fix.
> 
> or that is linux-stable tree?
> 
> YH
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Greg KH]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:37AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
> So, comments, please.

Could you change the Makefile to show that if we build and run this
tree, it really isn't Linus's tree?  Yes, I know the -git number will be
different, but that might not be very obvious to people reading bug
reports on lkml.

Just adding "-next" to the extraversion would be great.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 12:20:32PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:37AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 
> > So, comments, please.
> 
> Could you change the Makefile to show that if we build and run this
> tree, it really isn't Linus's tree?  Yes, I know the -git number will be
> different, but that might not be very obvious to people reading bug
> reports on lkml.
> 
> Just adding "-next" to the extraversion would be great.

A non-intrusive way to do so would be to add a file in the
top-level directory and name it localversion*.

For example:
echo '-next' > localversion-next

	Sam

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 417 bytes --]

Hi Sam,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:50:31 +0100 Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote:
>
> A non-intrusive way to do so would be to add a file in the
> top-level directory and name it localversion*.
> 
> For example:
> echo '-next' > localversion-next

Excellent, I will do this for the next release.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 537 bytes --]

Hi Greg,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:20:32 -0800 Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
>
> Could you change the Makefile to show that if we build and run this
> tree, it really isn't Linus's tree?  Yes, I know the -git number will be
> different, but that might not be very obvious to people reading bug
> reports on lkml.
> 
> Just adding "-next" to the extraversion would be great.

Yes, sure, I should have though of that.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Sam Ravnborg]

> 
> Also, more trees please ... :-)

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/kbuild.git master

It is rebased from time to time and is what gets into -mm

	Sam

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 366 bytes --]

Hi Sam,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:23:23 +0100 Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sam/kbuild.git master

Added, thanks.

> It is rebased from time to time and is what gets into -mm

That's fine.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Jeff Garzik]

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Also, more trees please ...  :-) 

Please add the 'NEXT' branch of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/libata-dev.git

to your list.  This is a throwaway meta-branch that is rebased often.

The 'master' branch of libata-dev.git always contains the base commit 
from torvalds/linux-2.6.git from which all other branches are based.  I 
never ever commit to the 'master' branch, only update it from 
torvalds/linux-2.6.git.


Andrew,

I will continue to maintain the 'ALL' branch exactly as before.  It may 
contain changes not suitable for 'NEXT', but suitable for -mm testing.

In my new development process, things will almost always land in 'ALL' 
before 'NEXT'.

	Jeff

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Jeff Garzik]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Please add the 'NEXT' branch of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/libata-dev.git
> 
> to your list.  This is a throwaway meta-branch that is rebased often.

Additional FYI:

Don't be worried if "git diff master..NEXT" is empty from time to time.

This condition occurs whenever the 'NEXT' queue is empty.

	Jeff

Re: linux-next: first tree

[James Bottomley]

On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 16:03 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Also, more trees please ...  :-) 
> 
> Please add the 'NEXT' branch of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/libata-dev.git
> 
> to your list.  This is a throwaway meta-branch that is rebased often.
> 
> The 'master' branch of libata-dev.git always contains the base commit 
> from torvalds/linux-2.6.git from which all other branches are based.  I 
> never ever commit to the 'master' branch, only update it from 
> torvalds/linux-2.6.git.
> 
> 
> Andrew,
> 
> I will continue to maintain the 'ALL' branch exactly as before.  It may 
> contain changes not suitable for 'NEXT', but suitable for -mm testing.
> 
> In my new development process, things will almost always land in 'ALL' 
> before 'NEXT'.

So does this indicate the meaning of upstream and upstream-fixes is
still the same?  I always took upstream-fixes to be bug fixes for this
-rc and upstream as queued for the next merge window, in which case NEXT
would be the union of those two sets?

James

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Jeff Garzik]

James Bottomley wrote:
> So does this indicate the meaning of upstream and upstream-fixes is
> still the same?  I always took upstream-fixes to be bug fixes for this
> -rc and upstream as queued for the next merge window, in which case NEXT
> would be the union of those two sets?


In practice, #upstream-fixes isn't very useful, because I send its 
contents to Linus very very rapidly once they are committed to that 
branch.  I then locally delete that branch once Linus merges it, and 
re-create it [again, locally] the next time I have some bug fixes to apply.

So it is a "somewhat throwaway" branch.

The main utility of #upstream-fixes is so that I can do
	git branch upstream-linus upstream-fixes
and then continue making commits in parallel with a Linus pull+push cycle.

The #upstream branch is much more useful, because that is where things 
for the next kernel are stored, during a bug-fix-only cycle.  This is 
largely equivalent to NEXT, though I plan to be more stringent in my 
requirements for NEXT commits than #upstream commits.

One thing to note is that "pure" rebases are somewhat rare; I much 
prefer to wait until the batch of commits lands in 
torvalds/linux-2.6.git, before I blow away and recreate (with a new 
torvalds HEAD) the branch in question.


So, to answer your question...  Fixes should go upstream fast enough 
that they should hit NEXT implicitly via a Linus pull+push.  It should 
be the union of two sets, yes, if a Linus cycle takes a long time.  When 
both #upstream and #upstream-fixes are active, I tend to always branch 
#upstream off of #upstream-fixes and/or do a "git pull . upstream-fixes" 
when updating #upstream.

	Jeff

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 676 bytes --]

Hi Jeff,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:03:19 -0500 Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
>
> Please add the 'NEXT' branch of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/libata-dev.git
> 
> to your list.  This is a throwaway meta-branch that is rebased often.

Added, thanks.

> I will continue to maintain the 'ALL' branch exactly as before.  It may 
> contain changes not suitable for 'NEXT', but suitable for -mm testing.
> 
> In my new development process, things will almost always land in 'ALL' 
> before 'NEXT'.

Sounds like a good plan.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Trond Myklebust]

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 00:35 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
> Also, more trees please ... :-)

Please add the 'linux-next' branch of

  git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/nfs-2.6.git

Cheers
  Trond

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 334 bytes --]

Hi Trond,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:27:57 -0500 Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> wrote:
>
> Please add the 'linux-next' branch of
> 
>   git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/nfs-2.6.git

Added, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 05:27:57PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 00:35 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 
> > Also, more trees please ... :-)
> 
> Please add the 'linux-next' branch of
> 
>   git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/nfs-2.6.git

And 'nfsd-next' at

	git://git.linux-nfs.org/~bfields/linux.git nfsd-next

--b.

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 262 bytes --]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:00:57 -0500 "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
>
> And 'nfsd-next' at
> 
> 	git://git.linux-nfs.org/~bfields/linux.git nfsd-next

Added, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[David Chinner]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:37AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Also, more trees please ... :-)

The current XFS tree that goes into -mm is:

git://oss.sgi.com:8090/xfs/xfs-2.6.git master

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 442 bytes --]

Hi David,

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:17:02 +1100 David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com> wrote:
>
> The current XFS tree that goes into -mm is:
> 
> git://oss.sgi.com:8090/xfs/xfs-2.6.git master

Added, thanks.

I have put you as the contact point - is this correct?  I notice that the
MAINTAINERS file has a different contact for XFS.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[David Chinner]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 11:50:40AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 10:17:02 +1100 David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com> wrote:
> >
> > The current XFS tree that goes into -mm is:
> > 
> > git://oss.sgi.com:8090/xfs/xfs-2.6.git master
> 
> Added, thanks.
> 
> I have put you as the contact point - is this correct?

Not really ;)

> I notice that the
> MAINTAINERS file has a different contact for XFS.

Yup - xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com. If you want a real person
on the end of problem reports feel free to leave me there,
but you should really also cc the xfs-masters address as well
to guarantee that the problem is seen and dealt with promptly
as I'm not always available.....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 580 bytes --]

Hi David,

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:10:42 +1100 David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com> wrote:
>
> > I notice that the
> > MAINTAINERS file has a different contact for XFS.
> 
> Yup - xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com. If you want a real person
> on the end of problem reports feel free to leave me there,
> but you should really also cc the xfs-masters address as well
> to guarantee that the problem is seen and dealt with promptly
> as I'm not always available.....

OK, added.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Bryan Wu]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>  I have created the first cut of the linux-next tree at
>  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git.
>
>  Things to know about this tree:
>
>  It has two branches - master and stable.  Stable is currently just Linus'
>  tree and will never rebase.  Master will rebase on an almost daily basis
>  (maybe slower at the start).
>
>  The tree consists of subsystem git and quilt trees.  Currently, the quilt
>  trees are integrated by importing them into appropriately based git
>  branches and then merging those branches.  This has the advantage that
>  any conflict resolution will onlt have to happen once at the merge point
>  rather than, possibly, sevveral times during the series.  However, I am
>  considering just applying the quilt trees on top of the current tree
>  to get a result more like Linus' tree - we will see. The git trees are
>  obviously just merged.
>
>  Between each merge, the tree was built with both an allmodconfig for both
>  powerpc and x86_64.
>
>  The tree currently contains:
>         Greg's driver-core, pci and usb quilt series (in that order)
>         Alasdair Kergon's device-mapper quilt tree
>         Jiri Kosina's hid git tree
>         Jean Delvare's i2c quilt tree
>         Randy Dunlap's kernel-doc quilt tree
>         Haavard Skinnemoen's avr32 git tree
>
>  There was only one unresolved conflict which could have been caused
>  because I was not sure where to base the kernel-doc tree.
>
>  So, comments, please.
>
>  Also, more trees please ... :-)
>
Hi Stephen,

Could you please add Blackfin tree to the linux-next

 git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cooloney/blackfin-2.6.git
for-linus

Thanks a lot.

And do you have the blackfin cross-compile toolchain?

Regards,
-Bryan

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 413 bytes --]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:33:50 +0800 "Bryan Wu" <cooloney.lkml@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Could you please add Blackfin tree to the linux-next
> 
>  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cooloney/blackfin-2.6.git
> for-linus

Added, thanks.

> And do you have the blackfin cross-compile toolchain?

No, I don't at the moment.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Robin Getz]

On Sat 16 Feb 2008 10:33, Stephen Rothwell pondered:
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:33:50 +0800 "Bryan Wu" <cooloney.lkml@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Could you please add Blackfin tree to the linux-next
> > 
> >  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cooloney/blackfin-2.6.git
> > for-linus
> 
> Added, thanks.
> 
> > And do you have the blackfin cross-compile toolchain?
> 
> No, I don't at the moment.

You can grab (i386 rpms and tar ball) that should work from:

http://blackfin.uclinux.org/gf/project/toolchain/frs/?action=FrsReleaseView&release_id=375

You will need:
 - toolchain blackfin-toolchain-08r1-8.i386.rpm
 - c library (either one of):
    - blackfin-toolchain-uclibc-default-08r1-8.i386.rpm
    - blackfin-toolchain-uclibc-full-08r1-8.i386.rpm

Other arch's & packages should appear shortly.

-Robin

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 708 bytes --]

Hi Robin,

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:23:47 -0500 Robin Getz <rgetz@blackfin.uclinux.org> wrote:
>
> You can grab (i386 rpms and tar ball) that should work from:
> 
> http://blackfin.uclinux.org/gf/project/toolchain/frs/?action=FrsReleaseView&release_id=375
> 
> You will need:
>  - toolchain blackfin-toolchain-08r1-8.i386.rpm
>  - c library (either one of):
>     - blackfin-toolchain-uclibc-default-08r1-8.i386.rpm
>     - blackfin-toolchain-uclibc-full-08r1-8.i386.rpm
> 
> Other arch's & packages should appear shortly.

Thanks, I will have a look.  My current build machines are powerpc, so I
may have to wait ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stefan Richter]

On 15 Feb, Stephen Rothwell wrote at LKML:
> I have created the first cut of the linux-next tree at
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git.
> 
> Things to know about this tree:
> 
> It has two branches - master and stable.  Stable is currently just Linus'
> tree and will never rebase.  Master will rebase on an almost daily basis
> (maybe slower at the start).
> 
> The tree consists of subsystem git and quilt trees.

Stephen, please add the for-next branch of linux1394-2.6.git to your
tree to receive updates for drivers/firewire/ and drivers/ieee1394/.
The URL is

    master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ieee1394/linux1394-2.6.git for-next

or via git protocol:

    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ieee1394/linux1394-2.6.git for-next

Contact addresses are:

    Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
    <linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>

Thanks.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- --=- =----
http://arcgraph.de/sr/

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 723 bytes --]

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 16:13:40 +0100 (CET) Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote:
>
> Stephen, please add the for-next branch of linux1394-2.6.git to your
> tree to receive updates for drivers/firewire/ and drivers/ieee1394/.
> The URL is
> 
>     master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ieee1394/linux1394-2.6.git for-next
> 
> or via git protocol:
> 
>     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ieee1394/linux1394-2.6.git for-next
> 
> Contact addresses are:
> 
>     Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
>     <linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>

Added, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Mark M. Hoffman]

Hi Stephen:

* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> [2008-02-15 00:35:37 +1100]:
> I have created the first cut of the linux-next tree at
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git.
> 
> Things to know about this tree:
> 
> It has two branches - master and stable.  Stable is currently just Linus'
> tree and will never rebase.  Master will rebase on an almost daily basis
> (maybe slower at the start).
> 
> The tree consists of subsystem git and quilt trees.  Currently, the quilt
> trees are integrated by importing them into appropriately based git
> branches and then merging those branches.  This has the advantage that
> any conflict resolution will onlt have to happen once at the merge point
> rather than, possibly, sevveral times during the series.  However, I am
> considering just applying the quilt trees on top of the current tree
> to get a result more like Linus' tree - we will see. The git trees are
> obviously just merged.
> 
> Between each merge, the tree was built with both an allmodconfig for both
> powerpc and x86_64.
> 
> The tree currently contains:
> 	Greg's driver-core, pci and usb quilt series (in that order)
> 	Alasdair Kergon's device-mapper quilt tree
> 	Jiri Kosina's hid git tree
> 	Jean Delvare's i2c quilt tree
> 	Randy Dunlap's kernel-doc quilt tree
> 	Haavard Skinnemoen's avr32 git tree
> 
> There was only one unresolved conflict which could have been caused
> because I was not sure where to base the kernel-doc tree.
> 
> So, comments, please.
> 
> Also, more trees please ... :-)

You can add the hwmon testing tree (from MAINTAINERS): 

> git lm-sensors.org:/kernel/mhoffman/hwmon-2.6.git testing

This tree gets rebased pretty much whenever Linus adds a new tag.  As a
rule of thumb, you should merge from Jean Delvare's i2c tree first.  The
hwmon/testing tree does not usually depend on anything else.

Thanks & regards,

-- 
Mark M. Hoffman
mhoffman@lightlink.com

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 573 bytes --]

Hi Mark,

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 14:09:57 -0500 "Mark M. Hoffman" <mhoffman@lightlink.com> wrote:
>
> You can add the hwmon testing tree (from MAINTAINERS): 
> 
> > git lm-sensors.org:/kernel/mhoffman/hwmon-2.6.git testing
> 
> This tree gets rebased pretty much whenever Linus adds a new tag.  As a
> rule of thumb, you should merge from Jean Delvare's i2c tree first.  The
> hwmon/testing tree does not usually depend on anything else.

Added, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Artem Bityutskiy]

Hi,

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Also, more trees please ... :-)

The UBI tree which is here:

git://git.infradead.org/~dedekind/ubi-2.6.git master

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 280 bytes --]

Hi Artem,

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 10:04:17 +0200 Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@yandex.ru> wrote:
>
> The UBI tree which is here:
> 
> git://git.infradead.org/~dedekind/ubi-2.6.git master

Added, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Paolo Ciarrocchi]

On Feb 14, 2008 2:35 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have created the first cut of the linux-next tree at

Hi Stephen,
I would like to update the "The development process" section in
Documentation/HOWTO including some information about the linux-next tree.

I understand what it's including but I didn't get how it will fit in
the process.
Is Linus going to pull from that tree as soon as we reach -rc0 or this
is just a tree
used for testing what will be pushed to Linus as soon as the two weeks
merge window
open?

Thanks.

Ciao,
-- 
Paolo
http://paolo.ciarrocchi.googlepages.com/

Re: linux-next: first tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1030 bytes --]

Hi Paolo,

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:11:33 +0100 "Paolo Ciarrocchi" <paolo.ciarrocchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would like to update the "The development process" section in
> Documentation/HOWTO including some information about the linux-next tree.
> 
> I understand what it's including but I didn't get how it will fit in
> the process.
> Is Linus going to pull from that tree as soon as we reach -rc0 or this
> is just a tree
> used for testing what will be pushed to Linus as soon as the two weeks
> merge window
> open?

The intention is the latter.  I hope to help people sort out some of the
conflicts and cross subsystem issues before we get into the merge window
and the code gets into Linus' tree.

Andrew Morton also hopes that the linux-next tree may get more testing
that the -mm tree did if we can stop it having to many regressions by
only including the less experimental code that is destined for the next
kernel release.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]