On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:27:24PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 09:09:29PM -0800, Simon Glass wrote: > > > >> [take 2, sorry] > >> > >> Hi Tom, > >> > >> I see quite a lot of non-x86 patches in my todo list - does that mean > >> that I should pick them up if I am happy with them, or just assign > >> them back to you once I've taken a look? > >> > >> I'm keen to get the sandbox fs and memory stuff in fairly early if > >> possible, since I fear breakages and the longer people have to test > >> the better. No one has screamed about map_sysmem() but I'm not sure if > >> anyone noticed. So I could pull these in, build and send a pull if > >> that suits? Perhaps one series at a time.... Also if Mike is having a > >> break should I pull in the SPI ones assigned to me? > >> > >> There is also buildman, and I'm not sure what to do about that. It > >> would be nice to have some feedback if people have tried it - I have > >> had a few private emails only. I think it's a great help, but it still > >> has some rough edges. > > > > Looking back at this, I think only buildman is left. Did all of the > > other patman related changes get submitted cleanly? I think the answer > > is we'll take in buildman now so it's easier to get folks to try it in > > their workflows and see where it takes us. > > Yes that's right. I can set up a bundle, along with the patman > additions, but actually I have found some problems with patman in the > latest mainline - checkpatch has changed. There are quite a few things > collected now that need fixing - e.g. Doug's fix to stop removing > Reviewed-by: tags. > > I will start by getting some patches out and we can take a look. Until > then is it OK to hold off on buildman?
Sounds good to me, thanks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
