wd at denx.de
Tue Nov 18 03:02:45 EST 2003
In message <20031117151948.GB30251 at ip68-0-152-218.tc.ph.cox.net> you wrote:
> > > Per your suggestion above, I created
> > > bk://source.mvista.com/linuxppc_2_4_mpc5200
> > Which source tree / change set is this based on?
> It's semi-moot. I've created a linux-2.4-mgt5100 tree, based off of
Can you please translate this into English for me?
My question was: is bk://source.mvista.com/linuxppc_2_4_mpc5200 base
on linuxppc_2_4 or linuxppc_2_4_devel, and which exact ChangeSet.
Why do you create a new tree ...-mgt5100 ? The MGT5100 can safely be
considered dead (except that ther eare some systems out there which
remain being supported),.
> Marcelo's tree to carefully check things into, and hopefully get him to
> pull from in 2.4.24-pre time-frame. I'll email everyone again once I've
> got it populated with stuff from Dale's tree.
Can you please explain the rationale behind creating a new source
tree? There is the old bk://source.mvista.com/linuxppc_2_4_mgt5100
tree, there is now Dave's new linuxppc_2_4_mpc5200 tree. There is
linux-2.4, linux-2.5, linuxppc_2_4_devel, linuxppc-2.4, linuxppc-2.5.
There is a couple other, less official source trees (like Ben's).
There is our CVS tree.
And instead of reducing the confusion about all the different kernel
source trees you created yet another one?? Why?
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd at denx.de
"It's like deja vu all over again." - Yogi Berra
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
More information about the Linuxppc-dev