Message ID | 1416431887-31348-1-git-send-email-tim.gardner@canonical.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 03:18:05PM -0600, tim.gardner@canonical.com wrote: > The following changes since commit e165e5b97ce461bb224e69c88d728501d8516508: > > UBUNTU: Ubuntu-3.13.0.40.47 (2014-11-03 11:40:45 -0800) > > are available in the git repository at: > > git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-trusty-meta.git > > for you to fetch changes up to 68c2f6998edad0893c1e47470bd97f288981a61e: > > UBUNTU: Cleanup RELEASE_NAME logic (2014-11-19 15:11:44 -0600) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Tim Gardner (2): > UBUNTU: Add HWE kernel meta packages > UBUNTU: Cleanup RELEASE_NAME logic > > meta-source/debian/changelog | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > meta-source/debian/control.common | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > meta-source/debian/control.d/generic | 28 ---------------------------- > meta-source/debian/control.d/lowlatency | 14 -------------- > meta-source/debian/rules | 5 +++-- > 5 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-) It feels very much like the first patch here adds a set of meta packages with -trusty hardwired into them, and the second a set which are configurable, but have trusty in them and overlap the first? +# +# Reference the current Hardware Enablement LTS generic and virtual kernel flavours. +Package: linux-image-hwe-generic-trusty and: +# +# Reference the current Hardware Enablement LTS generic and virtual kernel flavours. +# +Package: linux-image-hwe-generic-RELEASE_NAME [...] -RELEASE_NAME=saucy +RELEASE_NAME=trusty Confused? -apw
On 11/20/2014 04:44 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 03:18:05PM -0600, tim.gardner@canonical.com wrote: >> The following changes since commit e165e5b97ce461bb224e69c88d728501d8516508: >> >> UBUNTU: Ubuntu-3.13.0.40.47 (2014-11-03 11:40:45 -0800) >> >> are available in the git repository at: >> >> git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-trusty-meta.git >> >> for you to fetch changes up to 68c2f6998edad0893c1e47470bd97f288981a61e: >> >> UBUNTU: Cleanup RELEASE_NAME logic (2014-11-19 15:11:44 -0600) >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> Tim Gardner (2): >> UBUNTU: Add HWE kernel meta packages >> UBUNTU: Cleanup RELEASE_NAME logic >> >> meta-source/debian/changelog | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> meta-source/debian/control.common | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> meta-source/debian/control.d/generic | 28 ---------------------------- >> meta-source/debian/control.d/lowlatency | 14 -------------- >> meta-source/debian/rules | 5 +++-- >> 5 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-) > > It feels very much like the first patch here adds a set of meta packages > with -trusty hardwired into them, and the second a set which are > configurable, but have trusty in them and overlap the first? > > +# > +# Reference the current Hardware Enablement LTS generic and virtual kernel flavours. > +Package: linux-image-hwe-generic-trusty > > and: > > +# > +# Reference the current Hardware Enablement LTS generic and virtual kernel flavours. > +# > +Package: linux-image-hwe-generic-RELEASE_NAME > [...] > -RELEASE_NAME=saucy > +RELEASE_NAME=trusty > > Confused? > > -apw > Oh, I wasn't confused. Chris just wanted me to add a bit of flexibility to the release naming. How about if I just squash the whole mess into one patch ? It'll look less schizophrenic. Its not like we're gonna bisect this. rtg
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 08:27:49AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote: > Oh, I wasn't confused. Chris just wanted me to add a bit of flexibility > to the release naming. How about if I just squash the whole mess into > one patch ? It'll look less schizophrenic. Its not like we're gonna > bisect this. Yeah that would be a heap lot clearer. Thanks. -apw
On 11/20/2014 09:06 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 08:27:49AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote: > >> Oh, I wasn't confused. Chris just wanted me to add a bit of flexibility >> to the release naming. How about if I just squash the whole mess into >> one patch ? It'll look less schizophrenic. Its not like we're gonna >> bisect this. > > Yeah that would be a heap lot clearer. Thanks. > > -apw > Squashed and applied.