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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > * K.R. Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
