Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 4 Jan 2003 20:46:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 4 Jan 2003 20:46:20 -0500 Received: from krusty.dt.e-technik.Uni-Dortmund.DE ([129.217.163.1]:18193 "EHLO mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 4 Jan 2003 20:46:17 -0500 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 02:54:44 +0100 From: Matthias Andree To: Linux-Kernel mailing list Cc: Andreas Dilger Subject: Documentation/BK-usage/bksend problems? Message-ID: <20030105015444.GE29511@merlin.emma.line.org> Mail-Followup-To: Linux-Kernel mailing list , Andreas Dilger Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 921 Lines: 28 Hi, is bksend in wide use? I tried to use it to send a patch to ntp-stable with the help of this tool, and figured that the gnupatch part always omitted the first version if you give it a range such as bksend -r1.838..1.839. The changes are fine, for 1.838 and 1.839, but the patch itself only contains the effects of 1.839. The attached gzip_uu wrapped bk "receive"able stuff is fine again and contains both ChangeSets. It seems as though it would take "diff 1.839 against 1.838" for bk gnupatch and "changesets 1.838 to 1.839 inclusively" for bk send. If that matters: BitKeeper/Free version is bk-2.1.6-pre5 20020330075529 for x86-glibc22-linux -- Matthias Andree - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/