> Looks like I'd screwed up checking last time. Probably not that <g>... my branch did diverge over the course of the few days that we were thrashing around in the kernel trying to fix what I had broken two years ago in userspace. I can relate to why you were motivated to remove the thrashing around from the git history, but your git-foo is much stronger than mine. I wanted to try and get my branch back into line using a methodology that I understand to keep from ending up like this fellow: http://myweb.clemson.edu/~hubcap/harris.jpg I'm glad it worked out... my kernel.org for-next branch is updated now. so, I'll keep working the problem, using your d_drop idea first off... I'll be back with more information, and hopefully even have it fixed, soon... -Mike On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 07:14:26AM -0500, Mike Marshall wrote: > >> Your orangefs-untested branch has 5625087 commits. My "current" branch >> has 5625087 commits. In each all of the commit signatures match, except >> for the most recent 15 commits. The last 15 commits in my "current" >> branch were made from your orangefs-untested branch with "git format-patch" >> and applied to my "current" branch with "git am -s". "git log -p" shows that >> my most recent 15 commits differ from your most recent 15 commits by >> the addition of my "sign off" line. > > *blinks* > *checks* > > OK, ignore what I asked, then. Looks like I'd screwed up checking last time. > >> I will absolutely update my kernel.org for-next branch with the procedure you >> outlined, because you said so. >> >> I wish I understood it better, though... I can only guess at this point that >> the procedure you outlined will do some desirable thing to git metadata...? > > None whatsoever, ignore it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
