When I do a "bk pull" on the standard kernel, the result generates a
version of 2.5.72 rather than 2.5.73. Is this a known issue? I don't
remember seeing it mentioned on the list before.
Chris
--
Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10
Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557
3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986
Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: [email protected]
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 12:58:33AM -0400, Chris Friesen wrote:
> When I do a "bk pull" on the standard kernel, the result generates a
> version of 2.5.72 rather than 2.5.73. Is this a known issue? I don't
> remember seeing it mentioned on the list before.
The tag is in there:
http://linux.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.5/tags?nav=index.html
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 12:58:33AM -0400, Chris Friesen wrote:
>
>>When I do a "bk pull" on the standard kernel, the result generates a
>>version of 2.5.72 rather than 2.5.73. Is this a known issue? I don't
>>remember seeing it mentioned on the list before.
>>
>
> The tag is in there:
>
> http://linux.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.5/tags?nav=index.htm
Interesting--I seem to be missing at least one change. The last update
on that file in my tree is 1.411, and yet when I do a "bk pull" it
doesn't pick up anything new. Have I found a bk bug?
One thing of note is that I ran "bk pull" late last night right after
bkbits.net became available again. Is it possible I picked up a partial
update or something and now bk doesn't realize that it needs to get more
stuff?
I'm re-cloning a second tree from scratch to make sure that it gets
picked up in that tree.
Anything you want me to run in the affected tree to narrow down the issue?
Chris
--
Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10
Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557
3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986
Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: [email protected]