Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 14 (bcache)

2013-10-15 Thread Mark Brown
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:46:32AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > Oh wait, they were applied right after the merges that broke. I hadn't > checked for that. Yeah, it's because I've been doing incremental build checks - the builds fail at the point the tree gets merged in. signature.asc Descript

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 14 (bcache)

2013-10-15 Thread Thierry Reding
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 09:27:23PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:58:10AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On 10/14/13 07:48, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > > Gained a few conflicts, but nothing too exciting. x86 and ARM default > > > configurations build fine. There were some bu

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 14 (bcache)

2013-10-15 Thread Thierry Reding
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:58:10AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 10/14/13 07:48, Thierry Reding wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I've uploaded today's linux-next tree to the master branch of the > > repository below: > > > > git://gitorious.org/thierryreding/linux-next.git > > > > A next-201

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 14 (bcache)

2013-10-14 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:58:10AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 10/14/13 07:48, Thierry Reding wrote: > > Gained a few conflicts, but nothing too exciting. x86 and ARM default > > configurations build fine. There were some build failures unrelated to > Maybe you could build allmodconfig instea

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 14 (bcache)

2013-10-14 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 10/14/13 07:48, Thierry Reding wrote: > Hi all, > > I've uploaded today's linux-next tree to the master branch of the > repository below: > > git://gitorious.org/thierryreding/linux-next.git > > A next-20131014 tag is also provided for convenience. > > Gained a few conflicts, but not