On 10/24/10 19:22, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 14:24, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >> On 10/24/10 16:58, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>> On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 07:09, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >>>> Unfortunately that isn't where they are going to merge. The change >>>> required won't be huge, but Greg isn't going to take them if they >>>> don't merge cleanly. >>> >>> they merge cleanly, they just dont compile :p. what tree exactly >>> contains these changes you're referring to ? >>> >> either linux-next or staging-next branch of >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging-next-2.6.git;a=summary >> >> The all went in a few weeks back. > > i guess the trouble is that that tree is labeled as "junk tree, please > ignore". maybe gregkh can fix the labeling of his trees to reflect > reality. > >> Personally I just work against Gregs staging-next tree. > > our current development tends to focus on current release since that > is what we are pushing to customers. i know this doesnt properly > reflect the merging process, but it's what we have resources for > today. Sure. I know the feeling. Hopefully IIO will be generally more stable now the vast majority of dodgy corners effecting the driver core interface have been cleaned up ;) In this case for most drivers, the switch over is a 5 minute job. Admittedly that's a fair time given the number you have sent on this time round though so you have my sympathy! Bits where they never conformed to the abi are more of an issue, but we can pin those down in tree. Jonathan > -mike > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
