On Mon, May 10, 1999 at 07:02:08PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have a question about the frequent patches Russell generates. I am
> wondering if instead of generating patches against a stock 2.2.7 kernel,
> for example, it would be possibly to generate a patch for 2.2.7 against
> a 2.2.6 kernel with the last 2.2.6-rmk patch. Would this be beneficial
> to anyone else?
No, that sounds like a really bad idea. You can always generate such
a diff yourself.
> The reason I ask is, I have the kernel under a source
> control system at work, including the rmk patches. We are currently at
CVS has some facility for dealing with this kind of thing -- vendor
branches and so on. I'm not a CVS user so I can't tell you any more
about it.
Personally, when I want to upgrade a kernel which I've modified, I
diff my modifications against a clean tree (so in your case against
2.2.5-rmk4), then back out -rmk4, apply 2.2.6, 2.2.7, 2.2.7-rmk4, then
apply my own diffs. Yes, it's a pain. This encourages you to submit
your patches to russell more frequently :-)
--
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Windows and MacOS are products, contrived by engineers in the service of
specific companies. Unix, by contrast, is not so much a product as it is a
painstakingly compiled oral history of the hacker subculture." - N Stephenson
unsubscribe: body of `unsubscribe linux-arm' to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
