Hi Luis, On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 09:24:44 -0700 "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I don't see how pulling linux-stable into linux-next really helps anyone > > out, linux-stable is so far behind what is in linux-next it's not funny. > > By pulling linux-stable into linux-next you get to be able to run > things like this from within linux-next: > > git format-patch --grep="stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" -o > $PENDING_STABLE_DIR v3.5.4.. $MY_FILES > > That is, from v3.5.4 up to that day's linux-next tag. > > Without linux-stable linux-next does not get the v3.5.4 tags to allow > me / users of compat-drivers to do this. We do this to accelerate the > incorporation of stable pending-stable patches into a release based on > a stable extraversion release. You need to have linux-stable as a remote in your tree then. linux-stable and linux-next are independent tree and will never share any commits that are not in Linus' tree as well. I do not need more commits and tags in my tree than I already have. > Right, absolutely! Using a remote arrangements fixes this completely > for me. I alone can live happy doing what I do but since I have users > depending on using compat-drivers to make their own set of releases > and test things it means I have to get folks using compat-drivers to > also set up the same git remotes arrangements. That's fine but I'm > looking to simplify it if I can for users. If they fetch from your tree, and your tree has Linus' tree and linux-next and linux-stable in it (and you have local tracking branches for those trees, or they explicitly use --tags when they fetch) then they will get all that from you. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpqZot0vir5i.pgp
Description: PGP signature
