On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 17:29 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 2.6.12 is some time away, if for no other reason than the fact that this
> SCM thing has obviously eaten two weeks of my time. So I'd be inclined to
> chalk this up as a "learning experience" with git, and just go forward.
Fair enough.
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 10:10 +1000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 17:03 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Git does work like BK in the way that you cannot remove history when you
> > have distributed it. Once it's there, it's there.
>
> But older history can be pruned, and there's r
On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 17:03 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> The patches from you I have in my tree are:
>
> scsi: add DID_REQUEUE to the error handling
> zfcp: add point-2-point support
> [PATCH] Convert i2o to compat_ioctl
> [PATCH] kill old EH constants
> [PATCH] scs
On Mon, 2005-04-18 at 14:39 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Linus, the rc-fixes repo is ready for applying ... it's the same one I
> > announced on linux-scsi and lkml a while ago just with the git date
> > information updated to be correct (the misc one should wait until after
> > 2.6.12 is final
As of today, I have two SCSI git trees operational:
rsync://www.parisc-linux.org/~jejb/scsi-rc-fixes-2.6.git
and
rsync://www.parisc-linux.org/~jejb/scsi-misc-2.6.git
The latter has a non trivial merge in it because of a conflict in
scsi_device.h, so merges actually do work ...
The trees are ex
I noticed this when I tried a non-trivial scsi merge and checked the
results against BK. The problem is that remove_entry_at() actually
decrements active_nr, so decrementing it in add_cache_entry() before
calling remove_entry_at() is a double decrement (hence we lose cache
entries at the end).
Ja
6 matches
Mail list logo
