Re: Question about the commits found in a stable tree

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:16:14PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 09:10:32PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> > Hi Greg,
>>
>> <Fixing the stable kernel mailing list address...>
>>
>> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:55:56AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > >
>> > > > I'd like to write a tool that would parse the message of commits in a
>> > > stable
>> > > > tree and retrieves the associated upstream commits.
>> > > >
>> > > > It seems that stable commits provides this information through their log:
>> > > >
>> > > > "commit xxxxxxxx upstream."
>
> Currently there are 3 different formats used for backports of a single
> commit, which are:
>
> gregkh:          commit $HASH upstream.
> davem:           [ Upstream commit $HASH ]

ah thanks I missed the last one :)

> git-cherry-pick: (cherry-picked from commit $HASH)

is this format used by any stable trees ?

>
> For backports that correspond to multiple upstream commits, the format
> varies a bit.  I haven't attempted to parse those messages
> automatically.
>
>> > > > Is this something I can rely on safely ?
>> > >
>> > > What do you mean, "rely on safely"?
>> >
>> >
>> > As you guessed, I meant that if the pattern change in the future, then any
>> > tools that use this pattern will break.
>>
>> That's true.
>>
>> > > Look at the past 8 years of stable
>> > > commits to see if you can determine a pattern you can use, but I can
>> > > never guarantee future patterns, sorry.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Don't you think that this link to the upstream commit is an important
>> > information ?
>>
>> I do, which is why I have been putting it in the commits for the past 8
>> years.
>>
>> You are asking me to guarantee a specific pattern of words will always
>> be used in the future, which is an impossible request, as I'm sure you
>> will agree, as no one can predict the future.
>
> I think we should specify a format that everyone should use.  I did
> draft some new wording for stable_kernel_rules.txt which I should send
> out...
>

I agree but it seems that Greg thinks that won't be possible in the
long term even if a pattern is specified.

Thanks
--
Francis
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]