On 02/16/2012 03:02 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
That's the problem. I have a patch that detects this and abort is a non
bare upstream is used. I just need to send them .. which I'll do when
I get back to my desk next week.
There are two reason for this bare clone requirement:
- technical: this scales to several hundred branches. cloning, and
iterating
remote branches to create local tracking branches is noisy and
time consuming. So there's a trick that has been in use for years
that you can clone a bare upstream, and mass convert the branches
to local in a single operation.
- social: you want to do your development in a different tree from the
one that is being cloned and used. That way the tree is clean, and
you
are building what you expect.
Do I want to do my development in a different tree? Are you sure? ;)
I don't need to scale to hundreds of branches -- I just have one small
patch I wanted to test. I already have it in a "clean" tree -- it's a
committed changeset, with a commit message and everything, even though I
haven't even been able to *test* it yet!
I'm just trying to test a small kernel/meta patch, and the poorly
documented list of setup requirements is growing longer and longer. All
this stuff may be good practice for a more complicated scenario, but so
far it seems like enormous overkill for my use case...
Hollis Blanchard
Mentor Graphics, Embedded Systems Division
_______________________________________________
yocto mailing list
yocto@yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
