[ Please CC me I am not subscribed to LKML ]
[QUOTE]
h, and as some people already noticed, the numbering means that the
tar-balls and patches are now in a new directory:
/pub/linux/kernel/v3.0
(under "testing/", since that's what we do with -rc releases).
However, I did *not* rename the git tree, because that would just be a
huge inconvenience to git users, so it's still in the same old place
and yes, that means that my git tree is still called "linux-2.6.git"
on kernel.org. But it has the v3.0-rc1 tag in it.
I'll probably add a symlink or something, if people really hate being
reminded about our long history with the "2.6" numbering. But that
won't be until closer to the real release, methinks.
Linus
[/QUOTE]
First of all, congrats to Linux v3.0-rc1!
As you have found by yourself this new numbering forces a bit of
rethinking some of (y)our (daily) workflows.
( The new location of Linux v3.0-rc1 tarball was my 1st "problem" when
converting my kernel-buildsystem. )
[A] REPOSITORY NAMES
BUT...
...your GIT tree is still called "linux-2.6" :-).
Lots of other GIT repsoitories still use a prefix "linux-2.6-", like
linux-2.6-tip, linux-2.6-rcu, linux-2.6-acpi, or look at net-2.6 or
drm-2.6.
NOW...
...it would be a good point to rename all repos to a more general/common name.
Especially, the "linux-2.6-" can go to /dev/nirvana.
[1] lists all trees merged into linux-next and can be used as an overview.
Here some examples with proposals for change:
EXAMPLE #1: Repos containing "linux-2.6-" prefix (IMHO even "linux-"
as prefix can be dropped)
1. linux-2.6-tip -> tip
2. linux-2.6-rcu -> rcu
3. linux-2.6-acpi -> acpi
EXAMPLE #2: Repos containing "-2.6" as suffix
1. net-2.6 -> net
2. drm-2.6 -> drm
3. wireless-2.6 -> wireless
4. sound-2.6 -> sound
[ Gold medal to Ted for his ext4 GIT tree :-). ]
EXAMPLE #3: WTF trees not fitting #1 or #2
In general: Use the directory-name where your drivers are stored, see
also MAINTAINERS file.
EXAMPLE #4: Repos using a separate GIT repo with -next suffix (for linux-next)
1. net-next-2.6 -> net-next
2. wireless-next-2.6 -> wireless-next
I know people won't like the idea on 1st look and hate me for no real
benefit/new features, but...
...PLEASE...
...don't start renaming to "3.0", in a decade we have the same problem
:-( and thus do it right from the beginning.
Thoughts?
[B] MY EXPERIENCES WITH v3.0-rc1
Here my 1st impressions:
I am mostly on linux-next and working with an adopted
kernel-buildsystem from Debian kernel team.
As a quick workaround, I changed package-name from "linux-2.6" to "linux-3.0".
This also led to a new folder linux-3.0 below $HOME/src.
A two digits major version number like 3.0(-rc1) is (currently) not
accepted, so the first line of debian/changelog looks like this:
linux-3.0 (3.0.0~rc1-1~next20110530.dileks1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
So, I used for now 3.0.0~rc1 (Note: Debian uses ~rcX in changelog files).
IIRC some READMEs, copyright files below debian-dir etc. have to be
adopted, too.
But as this work is for my personal amusement, I build 1st and enjoy...
$ cat /proc/version
Linux version 3.0.0-rc1-next20110530.1-686-small (Debian
3.0.0~rc1-1~next20110530.dileks1) (sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx) (gcc version
4.6.1 20110526 (prerelease) (Debian 4.6.0-10) ) #1 SMP Mon May 30
08:15:10 CEST 2011
- Sedat -
[1] http://git.us.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git;a=blob;f=Next/Trees
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
