On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 03:29:43PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009, Greg KH wrote: > > > > Here's something rather confusing. The URL: > > > > > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.27.y.git;a=commit;h=2d93148ab6988cad872e65d694c95e8944e1b62 > > > > > > brings up a page containing the commit you mentioned above. But that > > > commit was never added to the 2.6.27.y tree! It's part of Linus's main > > > tree. The actual commit applied as part of 2.6.27.23 was > > > 070bb0f3b6df167554f0ecdeb17a5bcdb1cd7b83. So what's going on here? > > > > Probably due to the fact that the stable tree is cloned with the "base" > > being Linus's main tree. So when you ask for a commit, and it can't > > find it in the local tree, it will go to the "base" to try to find it, > > and it does. > > Is this an issue with git, or with gitweb (or whatever program provides > the web interface), or just with the way the repositories are set up at > git.kernel.org? I don't know, I'm guessing it is the way the repos are set up on git.kernel.org combined with gitweb. > > It is a bit weird though, perhaps we should report this to the git > > developers. > > Should I report it on the git mailing list? Or would some person or > other mailing list be more suitable? The git mailing list is proably the best. here's how I created the repo on kernel.org in the beginning: git clone -s --bare ../torvalds/linux-2.6.git linux-2.6.27.y at the time that Linus's tree was at v2.6.27 thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
