On Friday 10 October 2008 17:27:00 Chris Snook wrote: > Dave Jones wrote: > > For a while, diffs in the Fedora kernel have followed the form > > > > linux-2.6-*.patch > > > > Then, we started seeing some git snapshots show up as > > > > git-*.diff > > > > and lately, everything seems to have gone bananas, with no > > particular scheme at all.. > > > > nvidia-agp.patch, percpu_counter_sum_cleanup.patch, xfs-barrier-fix.patch > > etc etc. > > > > Maybe I'm being overly anal. The linux-2.6- prefix is kind of pointless > > (given that duh, they're all going to be against Linux 2.6), but it > > does group things nicely in an ls output if nothing else. > > > > So, what are peoples thoughts on this? > > > > Dave > > If we'd prefix them with the source package name, in this case "kernel", it > would make it a lot easier to find things in /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES when > we've got SRPMs from different packages installed. We should probably > avoid using names that refer to a specific upstream version, because the > name becomes misleading once we rebase. When there's a suitable upstream > patch name, like the names Andrew Morton uses in -mm, we should probably > use those (perhaps prepended with kernel-) to make it clear what it > corresponds to upstream. Yeah, I'd be happy with <pkgname>-<tree id>-<description>.patch, omitting the tree id portion if there isn't one, or some variant thereof. Being able to do an 'ls kernel*.patch' is definitely useful. -- Jarod Wilson jarod@xxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
