On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 04:50:43PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > So you are saying that Alan Cox is violating the GPL since he releases his > > -ac kernels only as one single monolithic patch against the vanilla tree, > > not as individual patches (like Andrea Arcangeli does for example)? > > I think the motivation for this ridiculous thread is very obvious. > > I think Dave needs to type "man diff" 8) I think Dave needs a diff that allows me to keep as many patches in sync as bk lets me. We don't all have your superhuman patch-fu Alan 8-) I do periodic GNU diffs of the 'big bundle o' patches'. There are even split up versions of the patches. All there to see at k.o The merges Ive done with bitkeeper to Linus recently have been diffs already posted to the 2.4 commit list. Asides from the AGP bits, which were 99% already posted to linux-kernel. The remainder were trivial things, and they showed up in -bk an hour or so later anyways.. Dave -- | Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk | SuSE Labs - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
References:
- Re: UnitedLinux violating GPL?Horst von Brand
- Re: UnitedLinux violating GPL?David Woodhouse
- Re: UnitedLinux violating GPL?Hubert Mantel
- Re: UnitedLinux violating GPL?Alan Cox
- Prev by Date: Re: Userspace Test Framework for module loader porting
- Next by Date: why the new config process is a *big* step backwards
- Previous by thread: Re: UnitedLinux violating GPL?
- Next by thread: Re: UnitedLinux violating GPL?
- Indexes:[Main][Thread]