| To: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Patches, again... |
| From: | Andrew Klaassen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 29 Aug 2001 14:25:49 -0400 |
| In-reply-to: | <3B8D29F8.6A3F88C5@sgi.com> |
| Mail-followup-to: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| References: | <20010829125345.E7083@dkp.com> <3B8D29F8.6A3F88C5@sgi.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.3.20i |
On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 12:44:24PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > To back up a bit, kernel code in > patch-2.4.x-xfs-cvs-<date>.bz2 and patch-2.4.x-xfs-<date>.bz2 > is identical - the -cvs- version has all the cvs version > information, as well as command source tree. Ah. So they'd both track the pre- kernels and the like, then, the way that the CVS tree does? Or are they both created only when the CVS tree is exactly in line with a virgin 2.4.x kernel, not following the CVS tree as it tracks 2.4.x-pre-N kernels? Thanks. Andrew Klaassen |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Patches, again..., Seth Mos |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Patches, again..., Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Patches, again..., Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Patches, again..., Eric Sandeen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |