linux-apus-devel

import 2.3 in progress

[Roman Z. <zi...@fh...>]

Hi,

I'm currently importing the latest bitkeeper tree, but I still have the
branch problem (support request is pending), so please don't commit
anything yet (if you need to update something else use "-r
apus_20000626").
Anyway, as it's actually 2.4.0-test2, we could start discussing how the
2.4 source should be managed.
I usually use rev$SUBLEVEL$EXTRAVERSION, but if we use the bitkeeper tree
that doesn't really work, as they often also include pre-patches, so that
I'm currently use bk_<date> and apus_<date> for working tags.

bye, Roman

Re: import 2.3 in progress

[Michel <dae...@st...>]

Roman Zippel wrote:

> I'm currently importing the latest bitkeeper tree, but I still have the
> branch problem (support request is pending), so please don't commit
> anything yet (if you need to update something else use "-r
> apus_20000626").

Okay.


> Anyway, as it's actually 2.4.0-test2, we could start discussing how the
> 2.4 source should be managed.
> I usually use rev$SUBLEVEL$EXTRAVERSION, but if we use the bitkeeper tree
> that doesn't really work, as they often also include pre-patches, so that
> I'm currently use bk_<date> and apus_<date> for working tags.

Sounds good to me.

BTW can you also (at least theoretically ;) merge our code back into BK?


Michel


-- 
I'm so hungry, I could almost eat health food.
______________________________________________________________________________
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)  \  CS student and free software enthusiast
Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc,i386) user \   member of XFree86, Team *AMIGA*, AUGS

impport 2.4.0-test2 done

[Roman Z. <zi...@fh...>]

Hi,

> > I'm currently importing the latest bitkeeper tree, but I still have the
> > branch problem (support request is pending), so please don't commit
> > anything yet (if you need to update something else use "-r
> > apus_20000626").
> 
> Okay.

Now everyone can enjoy a new 2.4.0-test2 kernel. :)
I hope I didn't messed anything up. I included a version of amiserial that
compiles and seems to work at least as a module. I tested it at 9600 with
no flow control and I had no problems (but I didnt try very hard), Jouko, 
can you give it a try?

> BTW can you also (at least theoretically ;) merge our code back into BK?

No, I have no write access there.

bye, Roman