Hi Ian
On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 10:45:50AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-09-08 at 22:52 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Please take a look and let me know what you think about this variant.
> > Most likely I've forgotten something, but I don't know what it is.
> The submodules refer to local paths (../source/linux IIRC) rather than
> URLs on alioth, is that on purpose?
Relative URL references are expanded from the origin location, so
"../source/linux" based on ssh://git.debian.org/git/kernel/linux is
ssh://git.debian.org/git/kernel/source/linux.
> Or is it to avoid cloning the full
> linux history for each submodule? (i.e. git doesn't realise they are
> the same remote repo and can share stuff, so it would clone the full
> history multiple times)
It is not able to use a shared object store if not told by hand.
> Also genorig seems to be broken (wants the dfsg series). I suspect this
> now works completely differently?
I did not change genorig for the time being.
> Manually merging into all derived featuresets when changing the base
> (==none) featureset sounds annoying, and liable to being forgotten, but
> I guess that is pretty hard to automate?
We can at least check for such errors.
> Would it be possible to arrange for the base featureset to actually be
> in the main tree at the toplevel rather than as a submodule do you
> think? That at least would seem to be a far more natural arrangement.
Nope, a submodule can only live within an existing tree.
Bastian
--
Those who hate and fight must stop themselves -- otherwise it is not stopped.
-- Spock, "Day of the Dove", stardate unknown
