From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerry Van Baren Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:37:31 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot] Quick sanity test after my NAND patches In-Reply-To: <0554BEF07D437848AF01B9C9B5F0BC5D93D82EE1@dlee01.ent.ti.com> References: <0554BEF07D437848AF01B9C9B5F0BC5D93D82E24@dlee01.ent.ti.com> <20091106210801.GA31725@loki.buserror.net> <4AF49285.4050101@ge.com> <0554BEF07D437848AF01B9C9B5F0BC5D93D82EE1@dlee01.ent.ti.com> Message-ID: <4AF4971B.9080602@ge.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Paulraj, Sandeep wrote: > Scott, Jerry, [snip] >> I don't know if the technique will work for you (Sandeep), but for the >> libfdt synchronization, I literally extracted the patches from the >> master DTC repository (git format-patch) and applied them (git am). > > This might not work as git-am will complain about not being able to apply clean. I may be missing something, but if you hand-edit the patches so that they are still valid patches, they will apply cleanly. In my hand editing, I cut out all patch hunks to non-existing (for me) files (from the patch's file name header to the next file name header). This is simply a delete operation so it is pretty hard to screw up. I also changed the file paths for all file references to libfdt.h which is simply a substitution problem, again hard to screw up. I don't know how complex your starting point patches are, so that may be what I'm missing. Note that the MD5 hash will be different between my edited patch and the original patch, so you won't be able to correlate the u-boot/libfdt patch directly to the DTC/libfdt patch, but that would happen anyway. [snip] Best regards, gvb