Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:38:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:38:32 -0500 Received: from host194.steeleye.com ([216.33.1.194]:40976 "EHLO pogo.mtv1.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:38:25 -0500 Message-Id: <200203150238.g2F2cGe21131@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: lm@bitmover.com cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Problems using new Linux-2.4 bitkeeper repository. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:38:16 -0500 From: James Bottomley X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.1 (http://amavis.org/) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org How do those of us who've been using the http://gkernel.bitkeeper.net/marcelo-2.4 for development resync against the kernel24.bkbits.net tree? It looks like the changes from 2.4.18-pre8 onwards all have different patch IDs in the new tree; so when I try to do a pull from my current repository I get tons of conflicts, if I try to do a receive of just the patch set I get a resync error: takepatch: can't find parent ID jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com|ChangeSet|20020225230300|18879 in RESYNC/SCCS/s.ChangeSet The thought of taking everything back to the common ancestor and then trying to apply the changes one at a time and adding the change logs by hand isn't that appealing (I have 3 2.4 repositories, some with upwards of 10 additional change sets in them). James - 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/