arnd at arndb.de
Wed Mar 21 10:02:35 EST 2007
On Tuesday 20 March 2007 23:35:43 Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> On 20/03/2007, at 23:13, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > It's merged in 2.6.20-arnd3, but I generally don't like to have
> > it in my code, since it won't ever get upstream.
> Oh, it's unfortunate to hear that. May I ask why it won't ever be in
We had a long discussion on this topic last year. In short, the result
was that systemsim should be changed to simulate the system well enough
so we don't need any additional patches to the kernel. Hopefully,
their next version will do that, but I'm not sure what the exact
plans for systemsim are at this point.
> > If you think it helps, I can integrate the git stuff into my
> > scripts so that we get a branch in there for every patch set
> > I upload to my patches directory.
> Aha. I find it much more comfortable to work against a SCM (whatever
> it is) rather than against an extracted tarball. Way easier to get
> the latest code, revert changes, see what has changed in the tree,
> extract diffs, and, with a distributed system such as git, keep
> history for local development until the changes can be published
> (plus when they are released, all the history is kept) or easily
> distribute these custom sources among multiple local machines. So
> summarizing, yes, it'd be nice to have your cell-2.6 branch in synch :-)
> I'll check quilt though. Might be good enough for some other use cases.
Ok, I see your point. I always use git to get the latest sources and
then apply my own patches on top of it using quilt. If you want to do
the same based on my patches, then obviously you'd want them in git,
and use quilt to manage your patches that you send out to me.
More information about the cbe-oss-dev