[Linaro-dev] Second "Linaro kernel merge result of the moment" aka "arm_next" published

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Loïc Minier wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > I'm wondering if we can split the merged ARM kernel tree from the
> > Ubuntu patches. I'm not normally building ubuntu packages when
> > trying out kernels, and a lot of the stuff in the ubuntu tree
> > is not heading for mainline inclusion any time soon.
> > 
> > Obviously we need the ubuntu+linaro tree as well, especially
> > to build the packages, but I'm personally more interested in
> > the linaro (minus ubuntu) patches that are headed upstream.
> 
>  I'm +1 on this; it's something which has bugged me for a while.

OK, I have no problem with that.  I don't know the Ubuntu kernel tree 
well myself.  I initially thought about merging it as it could contain 
generic features that the Linaro kernel could benefit from.  But I don't 
know exactly what those are.  And I also wanted to shake out any merge 
issues in the perspective of having the Linaro tree merged back into the 
Ubuntu kernel tree at some point before a release.  Maybe it is best to 
keep the Ubuntu kernel free from the Linaro stuff after all.  In either 
cases I don't have a strong opinion.

>  We need a version of the tree with the Ubuntu stuff merged, as to
>  prepare Ubuntu packages, but our official main arm_next doesn't need to
>  carry the non-upstream Ubuntu bits.  (Carrying the Ubuntu bits which
>  are going upstream soon is useful though.)

They would need to be in a separate branch in the Maverick repository.

>  It's an extra burden, but we want arm_next.git to be upstreamish.  I
>  think John Rigby and Nicolas should see how to best handle the Ubuntu
>  bits, but our tree should look like an official upstream linux tree
>  with additional good stuff and sugar on top.  :-)

OK.  I'll kick out the Maverick branch from the next rebuild.


Nicolas