On Saturday 19 February 2005 11:55, Vadim Abrossimov wrote: > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 19:30:54 +0100, Blaisorblade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > Ok, I have two more requests, if possible: > > 1) add something like arch/um/Rules.make which is included everywhere > > needed > > 2) There is an error in the patch (even in Al's idea): you must swap, in > > the below code > > OK. I will do it. > Against which version you would suggest me to do it: > - as an add-on to 2.6.11-rc3-mm2 + Jeff's tarball (which already includes > the original USER_OBJ cleanup) For now, against this one. The patch is still in development, so this is the right choice. > - 2.6 bk > - any other > > Also I have more general questions about the usual way the uml community > works:
> - do the patches from Jeff's tarball are intended to be pushed in 2.6 BK? > if yes when and how? Yes, "when they are felt as ready". However the process in most cases is possibly (author?) -> possibly (someone, including me, forwarding it; I often forward patches directly to -mm) -> Jeff's tree -> -mm tree -> BitKeeper repository and final release. However, there are actually some little differences between the trees that interact with this patch. The patch also changes some additions to the Makefiles done in the Jeff's tree, for instance about "skas0" and "x11-fb". Those hunks will have to stay in the tree even after the patch is merged, while the rest will go with the relevant patches. I'm finding it not trivial to port these patches from the Jeff's tree to the mainline tree... there are some little differences which should move inside a "jeff-only" part of the patch I'm doing the port to get it merged as soon as 2.6.12. > - if one propose a patch against which version he/she should do it in > order to (1) be useful for the community (2) get the patch pushed in 2.6 > BK soon? (Presumably (1) and (2) have the same answer :->) Well, the Jeff's tree is highly experimental, so the casual user often does not apply the full tree, and patches can evolve in it for months, in the case of big rewrites (they are merged sooner if they are fixes). Probably the better way to get the patch immediately useful is to prepare it against -bk or -mm... after all, normally you don't get big hunks of Jeff's tree merged at once. When the patch is merged, it will need to get resync'ed against mainline anyway. -- Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Linux registered user n. 292729 http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
