Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753895AbXFDJ3R (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2007 05:29:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752777AbXFDJ3F (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2007 05:29:05 -0400 Received: from outbound-sin.frontbridge.com ([207.46.51.80]:25044 "EHLO outbound8-sin-R.bigfish.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752711AbXFDJ3D (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2007 05:29:03 -0400 X-BigFish: VP X-MS-Exchange-Organization-Antispam-Report: OrigIP: 163.181.251.8;Service: EHS X-Server-Uuid: 8C3DB987-180B-4465-9446-45C15473FD3E From: "Joachim Deguara" Organization: AMD To: "Matt Mackall" Subject: Re: patch-2.6.21.3-rt9 misnamed? Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 11:27:36 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 cc: "Ingo Molnar" , "K.R. Foley" , Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Thomas Gleixner" References: <465EE33B.4070502@cybsft.com> <20070531200109.GA8715@elte.hu> <20070601161111.GM11166@waste.org> In-Reply-To: <20070601161111.GM11166@waste.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <200706041127.37244.joachim.deguara@amd.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jun 2007 09:28:24.0008 (UTC) FILETIME=[B2E02480:01C7A68A] X-WSS-ID: 6A7D04B120G3965910-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1699 Lines: 50 On Friday 01 June 2007 18:11:11 Matt Mackall wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 10:01:09PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * K.R. Foley wrote: > > > Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * K.R. Foley wrote: > > > >> Ingo, > > > >> > > > >> I believe that patch-2.6.21.3-rt9 is misnamed. It applies cleanly to > > > >> 2.6.21 but seems to contain stuff that is already in 2.6.21.3. > > > > > > > > yes - it includes all of 2.6.21.3. > > > > > > > > Ingo > > > > > > So actually it is not really misnamed, it's just done a bit > > > differently than previous versions. Sorry. > > > > yeah. Maybe we should make the 2.6.21.3 -rt patches relative to 2.6.21.3 > > - but that would be one extra patching step for people who already have > > a 2.6.21 tree. But ... maybe that makes the most sense after all. > > Including 2.6.21.3 in your patch will break ketchup. ketchup already breaks with the current rt9 patch. lapdog{rt}$ ketchup -n 2.6-rt None -> 2.6.21.3-rt9 Unpacking linux-2.6.21.tar.bz2 Applying patch-2.6.21.3.bz2 Applying patch-2.6.21.3-rt9 lapdog{rt}$ head `which ketchup` #!/usr/bin/python # # ketchup 0.9.8 # http://selenic.com/ketchup/wiki As noted before rt9 is based one 2.6.21 so after ketchup brings the directory to 2.6.21.3 then applying rt9 fails. I would appreciate it if you base the rtX patch on the kernel you list as a prefix of that patch. It helps us that use ketchup and it just makes sense. -Joachim - 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/