Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1640117
| From | Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? |
| Date | 2017-05-12 04:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tG825-5LR-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tFIKm-6A2-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tFKsN-7Fb-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tFQoy-3dF-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <tFYYN-ax-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> writes:
> On 05/11/2017 01:59 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Eric W. Biederman
>>> <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thomas Gleixner appears to have a tree with all of those same commits
>>>> except with the BKrev tags stripped out.
>>>
>>> That's the best import - so use that tree by Thomas, and just use the
>>> git revision numbers in it (and say "tglx's linux-history tree" or
>>> something).
>>
>> I've been using this one by Rob Landley which seems good:
>>
>> https://landley.net/kdocs/fullhist/
>>
>> It's grafted into the modern history so you can search seamlessly
>> between the two which is pretty nice. I don't see any Bitkeeper tags
>> though.
>
> I went through and found/tagged the major old releases, did I forget to
> upload a new tarball after that?
No you didn't forget, I see several:
refs/tags/v1.2.0
refs/tags/v2.6.0
refs/tags/v4.5-rc3
refs/tags/v2.4.0
refs/tags/v1.0.0
refs/tags/v2.2.0
refs/tags/v2.0.0
refs/tags/v4.5-rc4
refs/tags/v4.5-rc5
refs/tags/v4.5-rc2
refs/tags/v0.0.1
refs/tags/v4.5-rc1
But in the original mail Eric was wanting to refer to a specific
Bitkeeper revision using the BK revision id, eg:
Fixes: BKrev: 3e8e57a1JvR25MkFRNzoz85l2Gzccg ("[PATCH] linux-2.5.66-signal-cleanup.patch")
In your tree that is c3c107051660 ("[PATCH] linux-2.5.66-signal-cleanup.patch"),
but you don't have the 3e8e57a1JvR25MkFRNzoz85l2Gzccg revision recorded
anywhere that I can see.
cheers
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2017-05-11 01:00 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-05-11 02:50 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> - 2017-05-11 09:10 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> - 2017-05-11 18:20 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> - 2017-05-12 04:00 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-05-12 09:50 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2017-05-12 17:00 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> - 2017-05-12 18:40 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> - 2017-05-12 19:50 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> - 2017-05-13 19:30 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> - 2017-05-13 21:40 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2017-05-13 06:20 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-05-13 11:40 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> - 2017-05-13 19:20 +0200
Re: Is there an recommended way to refer to bitkeepr commits? Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-05-12 18:50 +0200
csiph-web