[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: rsync vs BK kernel trees



On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 08:34:16PM +0100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > linuxppc_2_4_devel is where any remaining 2.4-specific development by
> > Cort is going on, and linuxppc_2_4_benh is Ben's tree (where the really
> > experimental stuff is). The rsync is just a regular snapshot of the
> > BitKeeper tree.
> 
> Actually, Cort is no longer maintaining PPC trees. linuxppc_2_4_devel
> contains support for more boards and is (slowly) beeing merged into
> linuxppc_2_4 and Marcelo as well. It was used as a playground for new
> developements when 2.5 wasn't started yet, and is used for new board
> support in 2.4 before it's ready for the stable tree.
> 
> My rsync kernel (also available as patches against official 2.4 on
> ftp.kernel.org) is based on linuxppc_2_4. It contains additional
> cutting-edge support for PowerMac machines. It's not really experimental
> any more, but some stuffs here didn't make it into the other trees yet
> for various reasons. I also have a kernel for experimental stuffs, but I
> don't advertise it to avoid adding more confusion ;)
> 
> Note that the current maintainer of the entire PPC architecture is Paul
> Mackerras (Cort resigned a while ago). I maintain the PowerMac support,
> and various other people are involved in support for the bazillion of
> boards/platforms supported by the PPC kernel.

Mmm, do you know if the POP patches (http://penguinppc.org/dev/pop) are
included in any of the above ? The above page dates from june 24, and
contains patches for a 2.4.18 kernel only. I wrote to Tom Gall, but got
no answer from him. In particular, i would be interested in a 2.5 kernel
wich include those patches.

Friendly,

Sven Luther





Reply to: