On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 11:01:43AM +0100, Aurelien DEGREMONT - Stagiaire wrote:
> Dean Roehrich a écrit :
> > It's all of the 2.6.10 kernel. Is there something else you want?
>
> No, in fact, i would like less features (no kdb, but it's not really
> important). The best solution will be to have a dmapi patch which could
> be used to build our own version of Kernel 2.6.10 tree.
You can reverse apply whichever patches you don't want from
the split-patches directory at the top level to get you back
to a mainline 2.6.10 kernel with only fs/dmapi and fs/xfs
updates in it.
> Your CVS tree is not so bad, we just don't know, because its a cvs
> repository, which code is stable, which modification is not.
Its all good; anything you see there has been tested and reviewed
internally before going in, so you really should be able to pick
up CVS and run with it just about any time and expect it to work.
> In fact, i try to extract a kernel patch from your cvs tree against
> kernel 2.6 without the kdb patch, only the xfs/dmapi modification. Maybe
> i missed something.
See above - this is trivial using split-patches/*.
cheers.
--
Nathan
|