In message [off-list ref] you wrote:
What is the relationship between the linuxppc-2.4 tree from
bk, and the anonymous cvs linuxppc_2_4_devel hosted by Denx?
Our linuxppc_2_4_devel CVS tree is a (modified, extended) copy of the
BK tree of the same name, which used to be the "official" development
tree but has been declared dead a long time ago.
The latter *seems* more stable, but I'm hoping to integrate
in patches for me JSE board after cleaning up patches, and
it's not clear which tree I should work with.
You should work with the official trees, i. e. linuxppc-2.4 or
linuxppc-2.5.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd@denx.de
It would be illogical to assume that all conditions remain stable
-- Spock, "The Enterprise" Incident", stardate 5027.3
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
You should work with the official trees, i. e. linuxppc-2.4 or
linuxppc-2.5.
Unless I made some mistake in cloning the linuxppc-2.{4,5} trees from
ppc.bkbits.net, (which is entirely possible as I'm a BK newbie), there
appears to be a fair amount of processor- and platform-specific stuff
in the Denx linuxppc_2_4_devel CVS tree which does not appear in the
ppc.bkbits.net BK trees (e.g. arch/ppc/5xxx_io/... ).
Is the Denx CVS tree "authoritative" with regard to those extras? Is
there any expectation that those bits found only in the Denx CVS tree
will eventually find their way into the ppc.bkbits.net tree(s)? (Or
some other, more appropriate tree(s)? If so, which?)
Thanks,
Chris
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 02:59:48PM -0600, Chris Clark wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
quoted
You should work with the official trees, i. e. linuxppc-2.4 or
linuxppc-2.5.
Unless I made some mistake in cloning the linuxppc-2.{4,5} trees from
ppc.bkbits.net, (which is entirely possible as I'm a BK newbie), there
appears to be a fair amount of processor- and platform-specific stuff
in the Denx linuxppc_2_4_devel CVS tree which does not appear in the
ppc.bkbits.net BK trees (e.g. arch/ppc/5xxx_io/... ).
Is the Denx CVS tree "authoritative" with regard to those extras? Is
there any expectation that those bits found only in the Denx CVS tree
will eventually find their way into the ppc.bkbits.net tree(s)? (Or
some other, more appropriate tree(s)? If so, which?)
For 2.4? Denx will probably be the "authoritative" tree. For 2.6 I am
hopeful that something can be worked out.
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/