Menu
▾
▴
linux-apus-devel
|
From: <fp...@zu...> - 2000-05-23 09:24:30
|
I propose the following stategy to handle the CVS repository on sourceforge: The trunk always contains the most recent "official" source tree of the entire APUS kernel source. When somebody wishes to make patches, (s)he creates a branch and makes the changes there. After checkin, we can have a peer review, and if it is found good, it is merged with the trunk, creating a new release. Using this, we do not have to "pollute" the mailing list with diffs. Another option would be to have the tunk as the official Linus kernel, and the stuff proposed above as a branch. And, we should define some naming policy for tags. -- Frank Petzold, IBM Zurich Research Laboratory, Säumerstrasse 4, CH-8803 Rüschlikon/Switzerland, Tel. +41-1-724-84-42 Fax. +41-1-724-89-56 Business email: fp...@zu... Private email: pe...@he... The opinions expressed here are mine and not necessarily those of IBM. |
|
From: Sven L. <lu...@dp...> - 2000-05-23 09:44:58
|
On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 11:22:24AM +0200, Frank Petzold wrote:
> I propose the following stategy to handle the CVS repository on sourceforge:
>
Well, lets discuss this again next week.
For now i will do the following :
* import into the cvs repository the latest common tree between 2.3 and 2.2
* then update the main (that would be 2.2) branch to current status, step by
step).
* fork the 2.3 branch out from the common version. and dp the same to bring
2.3 upto current status (as on sunsite).
later when 2.3 is working on apus, and 2.4 is released, ... we can move the
HEAD of the cvs tree to point to the new 2.4 branch, and create a new 2.5
branch, ...
Friendly,
Svne LUTHER
|
|
From: Geert U. <ge...@li...> - 2000-05-23 09:56:31
|
I think it would also be a good idea if someone propagates APUS stuff to the
Linux/PPC BitKeeper tree. I have an account there, but my time is limited (and
I don't have an APUS box).
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@li...
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
|
|
From: Sven L. <lu...@dp...> - 2000-05-23 10:02:56
|
On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 11:54:58AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > I think it would also be a good idea if someone propagates APUS stuff to the > Linux/PPC BitKeeper tree. I have an account there, but my time is limited (and > I don't have an APUS box). Huh, ... i thought jesper was doing just that, for the v2.3 tree, i don't think it make sense for the 2.2 tree, since it is only a temporary solution until we find the bug in the 2.3 kernel ? BTW, it would be nice if we had something like a blackboard where everyone could write stuff, and use that for a recapitulation of all that has transpired about this 2.3 issue. Once i have finalized the debian boot floppies and potato is released, i plan to have a look at that. BTW, Geert, do you have any idea how comes my scsi disk has decided to become read only by amiga-fdisk sudenly, while hdtoolbox and scsiconfig from p5 work fine ? and i also can write to the disk without problem ... Friendly, Sven LUTHER |
|
From: Michel <da...@re...> - 2000-05-23 10:58:26
|
Sven LUTHER wrote: > BTW, it would be nice if we had something like a blackboard where everyone > could write stuff, and use that for a recapitulation of all that has > transpired about this 2.3 issue. What about this mailing list? The archive will serve as the black board :) Michel -- ...and that is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped. ______________________________________________________________________________ Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS |
|
From: Sven L. <lu...@dp...> - 2000-05-23 11:11:40
|
On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 12:56:41PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote: > Sven LUTHER wrote: > > > BTW, it would be nice if we had something like a blackboard where everyone > > could write stuff, and use that for a recapitulation of all that has > > transpired about this 2.3 issue. > > What about this mailing list? The archive will serve as the black board :) Yes, sure, but it would be good to have a somewhat more syntethic recapitulation, unless omeone will write a mail to the list which recapitualte the state of it ? Friendly, Sven LUTHER |
|
From: Alan B. <al...@ms...> - 2000-05-23 11:36:19
|
hi, > i don't think it make sense for the 2.2 tree, since it is only a temporary > solution until we find the bug in the 2.3 kernel ? ummm, I'd like to see the 2.2 tree alive and well, after all, 2.3 is the development branch and people like me will like to have easy CVS access to 2.2.x to make the kernels for users until 2.4.x arrives 8-) > BTW, it would be nice if we had something like a blackboard where everyone > could write stuff, and use that for a recapitulation of all that has > transpired about this 2.3 issue. well, quite a few 2.3.x issues seem to be getting fixed on a weekly basis - but are all the patches submitted being applied? maybe some passed through unseen? alan |
|
From: Sven L. <lu...@dp...> - 2000-05-23 11:40:43
|
On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 12:33:43PM +0100, Alan Buxey wrote: > hi, > > > i don't think it make sense for the 2.2 tree, since it is only a temporary > > solution until we find the bug in the 2.3 kernel ? > > ummm, I'd like to see the 2.2 tree alive and well, after all, 2.3 is the > development branch and people like me will like to have easy CVS access to > 2.2.x to make the kernels for users until 2.4.x arrives 8-) Well, yes, but 2.2 is end of live, so no need to synchronize it with the bitkeeper /whatever tree, it is more an issue of the 2.2 m68k tree (which is no more maintained, because 2.3 works on m68k, ... > > BTW, it would be nice if we had something like a blackboard where everyone > > could write stuff, and use that for a recapitulation of all that has > > transpired about this 2.3 issue. > > well, quite a few 2.3.x issues seem to be getting fixed on a weekly basis > - but are all the patches submitted being applied? maybe some passed > through unseen? Don't know, ... Friendly, Sven LUTHER |
|
From: Alan B. <al...@ms...> - 2000-05-23 11:44:45
|
hi, > Well, yes, but 2.2 is end of live, so no need to synchronize it with the > bitkeeper /whatever tree, it is more an issue of the 2.2 m68k tree (which is > no more maintained, because 2.3 works on m68k, ... doesnt m68k get 2.2.14 etc then? Or are they [users + developers] all over on 2.3.x now ? still on LinuxAPUS we are on 2.2.10 with no sight of 2.2.14 (what are the issues? At least on sourceforge it'll be easier to keep track of the problems via the noticeboard systems) looking forward to the new era...it seems that sourceforge will remove a bottleneck by centralising resources...and we can look at 2.3.x ernestly alan |
|
From: Sven L. <lu...@dp...> - 2000-05-23 12:10:33
|
On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 12:42:09PM +0100, Alan Buxey wrote: > hi, > > > Well, yes, but 2.2 is end of live, so no need to synchronize it with the > > bitkeeper /whatever tree, it is more an issue of the 2.2 m68k tree (which is > > no more maintained, because 2.3 works on m68k, ... > > doesnt m68k get 2.2.14 etc then? Or are they [users + developers] all over > on 2.3.x now ? m68k has 2.2.10 and 2.3.x ... > still on LinuxAPUS we are on 2.2.10 with no sight of 2.2.14 (what are the > issues? At least on sourceforge it'll be easier to keep track of the > problems via the noticeboard systems) Well, 2.2.10 is base on 2.2.x/m68k which is stuck at 2.2.10, so there is no chance of 2.2.x to go further on apus, unless someone takes all the 2.2.x m68k patches, sort out the amiga related ones from the (atari/mac/whatever ones) and tries to apply the 2.2.11-15 patches to it. But the consensus, both from the apus guys (well mostly jesper) anbd the m68k ones (Jes sorensen) is that it is a waste of resource to try to work on 2.2.x and are concentrating on 2.3.x. If you would work on 2.2.10, both for apus and m68k, please contact Jes, he has some stuff already done ... > looking forward to the new era...it seems that sourceforge will remove a > bottleneck by centralising resources...and we can look at 2.3.x ernestly Well, i think not that it really was a bottle neck, just lack of people working on it. Lets hope this new structure will help more people to be involved in kernel developpment. Friendly, Sven LUTHER |
|
From: Jesper S. <js...@re...> - 2000-05-23 16:15:59
|
>>>>> "Alan" == Alan Buxey <al...@ms...> writes: Alan> looking forward to the new era...it seems that sourceforge will Alan> remove a bottleneck by centralising resources...and we can look Alan> at 2.3.x ernestly An empty string goes through even the tightest bottleneck amazingly fast. It's a _very_ long time since I've received any patches from anyone, so I don't think you can honestly call me a bottleneck :) Jesper |
|
From: Alan B. <al...@ms...> - 2000-05-23 16:23:45
|
hi, > An empty string goes through even the tightest bottleneck amazingly > fast. It's a _very_ long time since I've received any patches from > anyone, so I don't think you can honestly call me a bottleneck :) oh! no, not calling any person a bottleneck! :-) It was the old system...sending patches to this mailing list, scouring everywhere for the latest bit etc... now its all centralised and CVS'able etc alan |
|
From: Geert U. <ge...@li...> - 2000-05-24 08:28:12
|
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 12:33:43PM +0100, Alan Buxey wrote:
> > > i don't think it make sense for the 2.2 tree, since it is only a temporary
> > > solution until we find the bug in the 2.3 kernel ?
> >
> > ummm, I'd like to see the 2.2 tree alive and well, after all, 2.3 is the
> > development branch and people like me will like to have easy CVS access to
> > 2.2.x to make the kernels for users until 2.4.x arrives 8-)
>
> Well, yes, but 2.2 is end of live, so no need to synchronize it with the
> bitkeeper /whatever tree, it is more an issue of the 2.2 m68k tree (which is
> no more maintained, because 2.3 works on m68k, ...
More or less. 2.3.x isn't stable on '040 boxes, like my A4000.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@li...
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--IAA21647.959149188/aeon.tvd.be--
ReSent-Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 10:26:14 +0200 (MET DST)
ReSent-From: Geert Uytterhoeven <ge...@so...>
ReSent-To:
Linux/PPC on APUS development <lin...@li...>
ReSent-Subject: Re: CVS on sourceforge
ReSent-Message-ID: <Pin...@da...>
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 12:33:43PM +0100, Alan Buxey wrote:
> > > i don't think it make sense for the 2.2 tree, since it is only a temporary
> > > solution until we find the bug in the 2.3 kernel ?
> >
> > ummm, I'd like to see the 2.2 tree alive and well, after all, 2.3 is the
> > development branch and people like me will like to have easy CVS access to
> > 2.2.x to make the kernels for users until 2.4.x arrives 8-)
>
> Well, yes, but 2.2 is end of live, so no need to synchronize it with the
> bitkeeper /whatever tree, it is more an issue of the 2.2 m68k tree (which is
> no more maintained, because 2.3 works on m68k, ...
More or less. 2.3.x isn't stable on '040 boxes, like my A4000.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@li...
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--IAA21647.959149188/aeon.tvd.be--
|
|
From: Geert U. <ge...@li...> - 2000-05-23 20:09:54
|
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> BTW, Geert, do you have any idea how comes my scsi disk has decided to become
> read only by amiga-fdisk sudenly, while hdtoolbox and scsiconfig from p5 work
> fine ? and i also can write to the disk without problem ...
No.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@li...
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
|
|
From: Michel <da...@re...> - 2000-05-23 10:44:55
|
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>
> I think it would also be a good idea if someone propagates APUS stuff to the
> Linux/PPC BitKeeper tree. I have an account there, but my time is limited
> (and I don't have an APUS box).
Yes, I'd like to have the native and/or bitkeeper (or Paul's pmac-devel?) tree
integrated in our CVS if that is feasible so we can make diffs from time to
time and try to catch up.
Michel
--
Press every key to continue.
______________________________________________________________________________
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast
Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS
|
|
From: Jesper S. <js...@re...> - 2000-05-23 16:16:35
|
>>>>> "Michel" == Michel Dänzer <da...@re...> writes: Michel> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> I think it would also be a good idea if someone propagates APUS >> stuff to the Linux/PPC BitKeeper tree. I have an account there, but >> my time is limited (and I don't have an APUS box). Michel> Yes, I'd like to have the native and/or bitkeeper (or Paul's Michel> pmac-devel?) tree integrated in our CVS if that is feasible so Michel> we can make diffs from time to time and try to catch up. There's no point in trying to keep either Linus' tree or the biteeper tree in the CVS tree just to make diffs. Diffs can be made just fine against separate trees using 'diff' (as opposed to 'cvs diff'). The more you try to stuff in there, the more time someone has to spend keeping everything up to date. Jesoer |
|
From: Michel <dae...@st...> - 2000-05-25 14:38:50
|
Jesper Skov wrote: > There's no point in trying to keep either Linus' tree or the biteeper > tree in the CVS tree just to make diffs. Diffs can be made just fine > against separate trees using 'diff' (as opposed to 'cvs diff'). Okay. I have some spare time now, so if you give me instructions I'll set up boothack (?), 2.2.10 and (at least native) 2.3.99pre8 branches (?) so we can get this thing going. Michel -- There's no place like ~ ______________________________________________________________________________ Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS |
|
From: Jesper S. <js...@re...> - 2000-05-25 15:26:24
|
>>>>> "Michel" == Michel Dänzer <dae...@st...> writes: Michel> Jesper Skov wrote: >> There's no point in trying to keep either Linus' tree or the >> biteeper tree in the CVS tree just to make diffs. Diffs can be made >> just fine against separate trees using 'diff' (as opposed to 'cvs >> diff'). Michel> Okay. Michel> I have some spare time now, so if you give me instructions Michel> I'll set up boothack (?), 2.2.10 and (at least native) Michel> 2.3.99pre8 branches (?) so we can get this thing going. Instructions? For 2.3.x download whatever patches and kernel sources are required, unpack, apply patches, cvs import. See man pages for details. Jesper |
|
From: Roman Z. <zi...@fh...> - 2000-05-25 16:41:24
|
Hi, > I have some spare time now, so if you give me instructions I'll set up > boothack (?), 2.2.10 and (at least native) 2.3.99pre8 branches (?) so we can > get this thing going. Do we need branches? As much as I love to have different versions in a local cvs repository, but to do it over a possibly slow link? bye, Roman |
|
From: Michel <dae...@st...> - 2000-05-25 18:05:56
|
Roman Zippel wrote: > > I have some spare time now, so if you give me instructions I'll set up > > boothack (?), 2.2.10 and (at least native) 2.3.99pre8 branches (?) so we > > can get this thing going. > > Do we need branches? As much as I love to have different versions in a > local cvs repository, but to do it over a possibly slow link? Dunno, Sven suggested that. Does it have a significant impact? Michel -- Why drink & drive when you can smoke and fly??? ______________________________________________________________________________ Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS |
|
From: Geert U. <ge...@li...> - 2000-05-25 19:39:42
|
On Thu, 25 May 2000, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> Roman Zippel wrote:
> > > I have some spare time now, so if you give me instructions I'll set up
> > > boothack (?), 2.2.10 and (at least native) 2.3.99pre8 branches (?) so we
> > > can get this thing going.
> >
> > Do we need branches? As much as I love to have different versions in a
> > local cvs repository, but to do it over a possibly slow link?
>
> Dunno, Sven suggested that. Does it have a significant impact?
No, since cvs co will download only one version, possibly compressed.
Compare this to bitkeeper, where you do have to download everything (but the
repository files are compressed, unlike with CVS).
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@li...
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
|
|
From: Sven L. <lu...@dp...> - 2000-05-26 05:38:35
|
On Thu, May 25, 2000 at 06:32:58PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote: > Hi, > > > I have some spare time now, so if you give me instructions I'll set up > > boothack (?), 2.2.10 and (at least native) 2.3.99pre8 branches (?) so we can > > get this thing going. > > Do we need branches? As much as I love to have different versions in a > local cvs repository, but to do it over a possibly slow link? Well, yes, you only need to checkout whatever branch you feel like you need. Friendly, Sven LUTHER |
|
From: Michel <dae...@st...> - 2000-05-26 08:02:14
|
Sven LUTHER wrote: > > > I have some spare time now, so if you give me instructions I'll set up > > > boothack (?), 2.2.10 and (at least native) 2.3.99pre8 branches (?) so we > > > can get this thing going. > > > > Do we need branches? As much as I love to have different versions in a > > local cvs repository, but to do it over a possibly slow link? > > Well, yes, you only need to checkout whatever branch you feel like you need. I saw yesterday that Jesper had two modules for 2.2 and 2.3 and so I imported two trees: 2.2 (aliases: linux-apus-2.2, stable) has Sven's latest diff applied 2.3 (linux-apus-2.3, unstable) is the native 2.3.99-pre8. Roman, please commit your code there. I posted an announcement to this list about it yesterday, but unfortunately I made a typo in the address, and I didn't notice because the incoming mail server here was down. If possible, we can still import Jesper's modules for the history. Michel -- The Unix Guru's View of Sex: unzip; strip; touch; grep; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; umount; sleep ______________________________________________________________________________ Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS |
|
From: Sven L. <lu...@dp...> - 2000-05-26 08:05:33
|
On Fri, May 26, 2000 at 10:00:21AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote: > Sven LUTHER wrote: > > > > > I have some spare time now, so if you give me instructions I'll set up > > > > boothack (?), 2.2.10 and (at least native) 2.3.99pre8 branches (?) so we > > > can get this thing going. > > > > > > Do we need branches? As much as I love to have different versions in a > > > local cvs repository, but to do it over a possibly slow link? > > > > Well, yes, you only need to checkout whatever branch you feel like you need. > > I saw yesterday that Jesper had two modules for 2.2 and 2.3 and so I imported > two trees: Ok, nice, ... > 2.2 (aliases: linux-apus-2.2, stable) has Sven's latest diff applied > > 2.3 (linux-apus-2.3, unstable) is the native 2.3.99-pre8. Roman, please commit > your code there. that is native 2.3.99-pre8, as in ftp.kernel.org, isn't it ? we will need to apply the latest 2.3 patch to it, or maybe directly the patch with Roman's stuff ? > I posted an announcement to this list about it yesterday, but unfortunately I > made a typo in the address, and I didn't notice because the incoming mail > server here was down. > > If possible, we can still import Jesper's modules for the history. Yes, we can still do that, ... Will try contacting someone at sourceforge for it, ... Friendly, Sven LUTHER |
|
From: Michel <dae...@st...> - 2000-05-26 08:09:37
|
Sven LUTHER wrote: > that is native 2.3.99-pre8, as in ftp.kernel.org, isn't it ? Yep. > we will need to apply the latest 2.3 patch to it, or maybe directly the > patch with Roman's stuff ? I was thinking about the latter. If there's something in Jesper's latest stuff that we can't miss, it won't be hard to put it in again I guess. > > If possible, we can still import Jesper's modules for the history. > > Yes, we can still do that, ... > > Will try contacting someone at sourceforge for it, ... Something came to my mind at home yesterday: Would importing the '.' module work? Michel -- The computer revolution is over. The computers won. ______________________________________________________________________________ Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper) \ CS student and free software enthusiast Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \ member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X