Hi Greg,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Greg Ungerer <gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/26/2012 09:03 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Greg Ungerer<gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/26/2012 08:03 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Greg Ungerer<gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/26/2012 05:47 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Do you think I should just silently move the modified mcfne.h
to a mcf8390.h?
Sure. Why not?
We lose any git history linking the original and new file.
Your commit renaming-and-modifying it will provide the link?
I would normally do that with a "git mv". But isn't that going to
clash with your "git rm"? Or am I mis-understanding what you mean?
It may indeed give a merge conflict.
If the conflict is too complicated (we'll see in -next), I can remove its
scheduled deletion.
My concern here is that I expect that patch will go through DaveM's
netdev tree. And he may get a little annoyed when a merge conflict
Point taken.
arises in Linux next. Given that at this point we have the chance
to resolve it.
Removed from scheduled removal.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
