Subrata, I think your idea is a good one, It will keep good track of what has been changed for each special build making it easier for re-use in other special builds. I think this approach would address all the issues.
Klas, I understand your concerns but the problem with the version control (branches) approach is who will maintain and keep up to date all of the branches? IMHO it is better to keep everything mainstream that way all stays up to date and is visible to everyone with out checking out multiple branches. All, Keeping everything mainstream will only work well if there is a good regression plan established for making sure all patches are exercised before each release. I think with what we are doing as long as the patch applies LTP will probably compile and work ok. There needs to be some regression script that can be run to go through and set all the special #ifdef's and make sure everything applies ok. I have some patches I could submit to get this going, I'm just not sure on the correct directory naming scheme. Most of my patches are not because of the arch but because of the memory limitations. Should there be a directory: /ltp/patches/mem-limitations/duringruntime-64mb.patch Regards, Shane ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
