From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753969Ab0CFVfO (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Mar 2010 16:35:14 -0500 Received: from lazybastard.de ([212.112.238.170]:55351 "EHLO longford.logfs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751311Ab0CFVfN (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Mar 2010 16:35:13 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 1798 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:35:13 EST Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 22:35:01 +0100 From: =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel To: Linus Torvalds Cc: LKML , Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: Please pull logfs tree Message-ID: <20100306213501.GB21570@logfs.org> References: <20100306210459.GA21570@logfs.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 6 March 2010 13:26:46 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Jörn Engel wrote: > > > > 1) pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/joern/logfs.git > > and apply the patch at the bottom yourself. > > Not quite - it needs to be applied while merging, rather than applied > separately. It's a conflict, even though it's not a data-conflict, but a > semantic one. > > But that's trivial enough. "git pull --no-commit" + fixup + "git commit" > is trivially done, now that I was fore-warned. Thanks. > > > 2) pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/joern/logfs_for_2.6.34 > > A tree with the patch applied that won't work standalone but will work > > after being pulled into your tree (tested locally). > > No, that's horrible. Unbisectable. Not that anybody probably cares in this > case, but it's fundamentally wrong to merge something that doesn't work > before the merge. > > > 3) pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/joern/logfs_for_2.6.34_alternative > > A tree that merged your tree and the logfs tree, then has the patch > > applied. Works standalone but has an additional merge commit. > > That's ok, but I already did the trivial merge, which actually had another > conflict too (which showed up as a real data conflict on the Kconfig > file). Ok, learned something new again. Thank you for doing the trivial merge that would have taken me days to figure out. :) Jörn -- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, but not tried it. -- Donald Knuth