linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 649 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree produced a mountain of
conflicts so I have used the version from next-20100512 for today.
Please either merge Linus' tree into yours or rebase you tree on top of
Linus' tree.  There are a large number of commits that are in your tree
that have been rebased before being included into Linus' tree and this
caused conflicts with further changes in your tree.

Please consider changing your work flow so that you don't rebase things
in your tree before sending them to Linus.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Mauro,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the v4l-dvb tree produced a mountain of
> conflicts so I have used the version from next-20100512 for today.
> Please either merge Linus' tree into yours or rebase you tree on top of
> Linus' tree.  There are a large number of commits that are in your tree
> that have been rebased before being included into Linus' tree and this
> caused conflicts with further changes in your tree.

I'll be pulling from Linus on my tree. I did it yesterday, after my last changes,
but it seems that I've made a huge mistake... Several conflicts that I've already
fixed reappeared. I suspect that I've merged it with an older temporary branch
by mistake.

Anyway, it is fixed, by simply going back to the last reflog before the error,
and re-merging the new patches again. A pull from Linus didn't show any conflict.

So, it should be now OK for you to merge.

> Please consider changing your work flow so that you don't rebase things
> in your tree before sending them to Linus.

I'm already in process of changing my procedure. The problem is that I didn't find
yet a perfect way to handle my tree. I'm getting some new ideas, and intend to implement
them for 2.6.35 development cycle (linux-next for 2.6.36).

-- 

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the v4l-dvb tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1174 bytes --]

Hi Mauro,

On Thu, 13 May 2010 02:18:33 -0300 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> I'll be pulling from Linus on my tree. I did it yesterday, after my last changes,
> but it seems that I've made a huge mistake... Several conflicts that I've already
> fixed reappeared. I suspect that I've merged it with an older temporary branch
> by mistake.

That explains it.

> Anyway, it is fixed, by simply going back to the last reflog before the error,
> and re-merging the new patches again. A pull from Linus didn't show any conflict.
> 
> So, it should be now OK for you to merge.

Excellent, thanks.

> > Please consider changing your work flow so that you don't rebase things
> > in your tree before sending them to Linus.
> 
> I'm already in process of changing my procedure. The problem is that I didn't find
> yet a perfect way to handle my tree. I'm getting some new ideas, and intend to implement
> them for 2.6.35 development cycle (linux-next for 2.6.36).

OK, good.  The process doesn't have to be perfect ... ;-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]