Re: MPC5200 Patches
From: Tom Rini <hidden>
Date: 2003-11-17 18:50:18
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 09:33:13PM +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Tom & Dale, in message [ref] you wrote:quoted
Can I suggest breaking the trend slightly based on comments people have made about 2.5/2.6? Let's call it CONFIG_PPC_5xxx (and someday fix all of the others).OK, so the discussion has stopped. What's happening now? I sent our stuff. Dale has added some modification. We have more works in the queue. I think it makes little sense to continue without a common code base.
Okay. I've populated the following tree with what Dale had. Since there's a number of things which need to be cleaned up / tweaked (fear not, I will follow up with my questions and conerns), I recommend that you get this tree by doing the following: 1) Start with a clean copy of 'linux-2.4'. You can get this from bk://linux.bkbits.net/linux-2.4. 2) Copy linux-2.4 to linux-2.4-mpc5xxx (or whatever) and then do: 2a) cd linux-2.4-mpc5xxx 2b) bk parent bk://ppc.bkbits.net/linux-2.4-mpc5xxx 2c) bk pull -q What I plan on doing, and I'll let people know when this happens is to nuke this tree and start over, once things get fixed, so we can check this in, in an incremental manner and split out things that need to be run past lkml first for sanity's sake (such as exporting 2 more functions from drivers/ide/ide.c. It should be quickly accepted, but nonetheless). So what this means is DO NOT TRACK OR IMPORT THIS TREE INTO SOMETHING ELSE. THIS TREE EXISTS ONLY SO THAT WE CAN GET THE CODE INTO SHAPE FOR MARCELO AND CHECK IT IN AS SUCH AND THEN DELETE THIS PARTICULAR TREE. For fixing things either in this tree or adding new features, or whatever, a plain old GNU-style patch is probably best for now. -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/