Message ID | 20120925020716.GY5469@titan.lakedaemon.net |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Hi, On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:07:16PM -0400, Jason Cooper wrote: > Depends: > - Based against arm-soc/for-next Unfortunately this won't work. The arm-soc for-next branch is not a stable branch, it's the aggregate where we merge in the contents of different next/* branches for staging, but the branch itself doesn't get sent upstream. Can you rebase this branch against something that makes more sense? Ideally the branch that introduced the breakage, since that will minimize the upstream exposure to the bugs. -Olof
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 02:09:15PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:07:16PM -0400, Jason Cooper wrote: > > Depends: > > - Based against arm-soc/for-next > > Unfortunately this won't work. The arm-soc for-next branch is not a stable > branch, it's the aggregate where we merge in the contents of different next/* > branches for staging, but the branch itself doesn't get sent upstream. ok. > Can you rebase this branch against something that makes more sense? Ideally the > branch that introduced the breakage, since that will minimize the upstream > exposure to the bugs. will do. May be a couple of hours... thx, Jason.