Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1507937
| From | Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? |
| Date | 2016-10-25 05:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sw082-82K-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <svUP0-4Ew-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <svUYG-4HF-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <svVi1-4Oo-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <svWH7-5Ra-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <svXtv-6p0-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 05:06:42PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > But in that case, what if your patch generation script used a filter to > > exclude those binary files? No harm to that target audience, and it would > > actually make them behave better for distro builds. Though that might be > > counter to the goal of making them disappear entirely. :) > > Heh, I'd rather people get the warning that "oops, something is > incomplete". They can still work with the end result, but at least > they got some indication that hey, that patch didn't work wonderfully > well... > > To be honest, I really would like to not do the tar-balls and patches at all. > > But maybe rather than saying "it's only for legacy 'patch' users", I > could just say that it's getting phased out, and say "you have to use > 'git apply' to apply them". > > Then I could just enable "--binary" and "-M", and see what happens. I like this idea! > I suspect that these days, git is so ubiquitous that it's ok. > > And then in a few years, maybe I can just stop doing patches entirely, > having proved the point that everybody already has git ;) Honestly, the only people that don't have access to git to pull down kernel sources? People who haven't yet got a kernel up and running, who will probably get there via a distro kernel. ;) Side note in favor of tarballs: I know Fedora likes upstream to have tarballs, with checksums provided, so that packages can be verified to contain a legitimate upstream source tarball, rather than a random tarball created by the packager that could have some extraneous bits (possibly malicious) added to them. One can certainly examine and validate a generated tarball too, but it's a fair bit more work than just "does the checksum match?" and not as easily automated. -- Jarod Wilson jarod@redhat.com
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-10-24 20:30 +0200
Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2016-10-24 21:50 +0200
Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org> - 2016-10-24 23:10 +0200
Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2016-10-24 23:20 +0200
Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-10-24 23:30 +0200
Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2016-10-24 23:50 +0200
Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-10-25 01:20 +0200
Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2016-10-25 02:10 +0200
Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> - 2016-10-25 05:00 +0200
Re: Linux-4.X-rcY patches can't be applied with git? Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org> - 2016-10-25 13:40 +0200
csiph-web