> > > There's no risk because you are supposed to apply both patches. I > > > don't apply binding patches that are a part of a series like this. > > > > Yes, this is always guaranteed to happen, because "git bisect" > > understand patch series. Oh, wait. > > What!? If the binding patch with the header comes first, how would > bisect build the driver change without the header? The driver is already in tree, and includes array of strings. When you change the define, you need to update the array, too, because you don't want to have invalid value in there. > > Patches are supposed to be correct on their own. If your repository > > filtering can not handle that, you need to fix that... > > I'm just asking you to follow the process that *everyone* else is > following and works. It's not really about the repository filtering. > That doesn't care. A binding ABI is defined by the schema and any > defines it has. That is the logical unit that stands on its own. It does not work in this case. Best regards, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
