On Thursday, October 28, 2010 20:52:44 Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> Em 28-10-2010 16:01, Jan Hoogenraad escreveu:
> > Douglas:
> > First of all thank you for the support you have done so far.
> > Hans:
> > Is it possible to build the tar from
> > http://git.linuxtv.org/mchehab/new_build.git
> > automatically each night, just like the way the hg archive was built ?
> > I don't have sufficient processing power to run that.
I haven't had time to look into new_build.git. It is on my todo list. I hope
to have some time next week.
> > Mauro:
> > I'm willing to give the mercurial conversion a shot.
> > I do not know a lot about v4l, but tend to be able to resolve this kind of
> > release-type issues.
> > The way it seems to me is that first new_build.git should compile for all
> > releases that the hg archive supported.
> We still lack a maintainer for the new_build ;) I think we need to have
> with time looking on it, before flooding the ML's with breakage reports.
> I did the initial work: the tree is compiling, and I did a basic test with a
> drivers on v2.6.32, but, unfortunately, I won't have time to maintain it.
> So, someone needs to head it. A few already talked to me about maintaining it
> it in priv, but didn't manifest yet publicly, because they're still analysing
> Also, so far, I received only one patch not made by me.
> Currently, the new_build tree covers kernel versions from .32 to .36, but, if
> handles it, the backport patches will break with the time. Probably, some API
> change on .37, requiring a new backport patch. In the meantime, someone may
> one of the backported lines, breaking those patches.
> The good news is that there are just a few backport patches to maintain:
> 8 patches were enough for 2.6.32 (plus the v4l/compat.h logic).
> It is up to the one that takes the maintainership to decide what will be the
> supported version.
> IMHO, 2.6.32 is a good choice, as it has a long-maintained stable version and
> almost all
> major distros are using it as basis for their newest version (and anyone
> 'crazy' enough
> to use an experimental, pre -rc version, is likely using a brand new
> distribution ;) ).
I agree. I will kill the mercurial builds this weekend. After I have looked at
I'll see if I can set up an automated build for it (or at least do some
I'm not going to spend a lot of time on it as long as there is no maintainer.
once a maintainer is announced, then I will finish the work on the daily build
that it gets included every day.
Hans Verkuil - video4linux developer - sponsored by TANDBERG, part of Cisco
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html