Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 09:07:18 -0700 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r289700 - in head/sys/compat/linuxkpi: . common common/include common/include/asm common/include/linux common/src Message-ID: <5627B836.7010704@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <5627B5A4.70800@selasky.org> References: <201510211501.t9LF1phM000793@repo.freebsd.org> <5627AF01.8070501@FreeBSD.org> <5627B1B5.30607@selasky.org> <5627B24A.4010905@FreeBSD.org> <5627B5A4.70800@selasky.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On 10/21/2015 8:56 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > On 10/21/15 17:42, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> On 10/21/2015 8:39 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: >>> On 10/21/15 17:28, Bryan Drewery wrote: >>>> On 10/21/2015 8:01 AM, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: >>>>> Author: hselasky >>>>> Date: Wed Oct 21 15:01:51 2015 >>>>> New Revision: 289700 >>>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/289700 >>>>> >>>>> Log: >>>>> Start process of moving the LinuxKPI into the default kernel >>>>> build by >>>>> creating an empty directory tree. >>>>> >>>>> Sponsored by: Mellanox Technologies >>>>> >>>>> Added: >>>>> head/sys/compat/linuxkpi/ >>>>> head/sys/compat/linuxkpi/common/ >>>>> head/sys/compat/linuxkpi/common/include/ >>>>> head/sys/compat/linuxkpi/common/include/asm/ >>>>> head/sys/compat/linuxkpi/common/include/linux/ >>>>> head/sys/compat/linuxkpi/common/src/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> This makes me think a branch should be used instead. >>>> >>> >>> Most of what will be done is "svn mv" out of "sys/ofed" and changing >>> some include paths in sys/modules and sys/conf . Can you explain why you >>> think a branch is required ? >> >> Because you're splitting commits up that should otherwise not be split >> up. There's no reason to commit empty directories before a 'svn mv' into >> them. > > OK, I see. Do you want me to revert the "svn add" and put it altogether > in a single commit, or is not not that big deal if I keep the next > linuxkpi file moving as a single commit? No, it's fine. I just didn't want to see subsequent partial commits that broke the tree. -- Regards, Bryan Drewery [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWJ7g2AAoJEDXXcbtuRpfPXhkH/AwxHmkvrBgbgGNxdXsq5Lec drnNLxT51JTyXknsSPVdq0cymFfMsGVhQhBv4SVmaumm//ASDIP9rtpON3YH8Nja aS6mF1Fk7npru9Fx9wKKjwb3Fwj5cWKnivpoxZjO9HVL2I/vA3vH8jC0vewNdD/y 8JwOQuDmJVYGLH2+BZfWKakdqjPMJgUTI/67n9XHSDj2HI4MMcftYQd6/9UgvIou FqK1IXXMsy0sC+bLai4FI2IDTB+SSs323BxNROPgLEU89qFKIKKiTPeL0KCYtaDQ UTubNffJD8aQeqzXGDmFwSKK7LNQkC9iWyTmDhWbfAKzOd1ohCQk8L8/I9Ls9Zo= =8E1x -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5627B836.7010704>