From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 5 14:36:40 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0FF61065670; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 14:36:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 941678FC1A; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 14:36:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (66.111.2.69.static.nyinternet.net [66.111.2.69]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2EC3F46B46; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 09:36:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (smtp.hudson-trading.com [209.249.190.9]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPA id DE92F8A01F; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 09:36:38 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 09:36:08 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (FreeBSD/7.2-CBSD-20100120; KDE/4.3.1; amd64; ; ) References: <4B6BD8B2.2060504@icyb.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <4B6BD8B2.2060504@icyb.net.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201002050936.08434.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:36:38 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.1 at bigwig.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=4.2 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on bigwig.baldwin.cx Cc: Andriy Gapon Subject: Re: acpica in stable/8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:36:40 -0000 On Friday 05 February 2010 3:37:06 am Andriy Gapon wrote: > > I would like to bring version of ACPICA in stable/8 to that of head, that is > 20100121. > > Here's svn status and svn diff outputs for the merge: > http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/stable-8-acpi.status.txt > http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/stable-8-acpi.diff > > I've performed this MFC by doing series of svn merges first to sys, then to > usr.sbin/acpi. I hope that this is a correct approach. > I have some doubts because of heard suggestions that such merges should be done > from vendor area. But, OTOH, in head there were direct commits sys to fix > consequences of merge from vendor area. > Subversion gurus, please advise! You should just MFC the changes from HEAD. You should not merge from the vendor branch directly into a stable branch. The only time that would be appropriate would be to merge a vendor change into a stable branch that was never merged to HEAD (e.g. if some vendor software 'foo' was upgraded from version 1 to version 2 in HEAD but was version 1 in a stable branch and later a patch release 1.1 that fixed a security bug came out, then 1.1 would be imported into the vendor area and directly merged to the stable branch). -- John Baldwin