CVS linux Vs. -test10

[John Marvin]

> > I had dinner with Bdale Garbee last night and one of two things he made
> > clear was we need to unfork from debian and linus's tree in order to move
> > forward. All our CVS branches need to become obsolete or "local sandboxes"
> > of the respective upstream partners. Feeding kernel bits upstream will
> > bring a new level of visibility (and *HELP*) to the parisc-linux port.
>
> that's true.  last time we discussed this several people were unhappy
> with the idea of sending our current work to Linus.  Is anyone unhappy
> with doing this now?
>

Are we suggesting that we populate include/asm-parisc* and arch/parisc*
WITHOUT the machine independent changes in the rest of the tree?
If that is the case, I guess I don't object, although I would want
to make sure that Linus knew the state of the code, and that it would
not work without a patch containing changes to the machine independent
part, and that followup patches to these branches are likely to be
huge. We should also add a README in arch/parisc that explains the
above (and where to get patches, how to access CVS, etc.). We also
need someone to set up an automatic nightly? patch generator.

I certainly don't want to try to get the machine independent changes in
yet, since we still have some major issues to fix/clean there, and I doubt
Linus would want them at this time anyway.

John Marvin
jsm@fc.hp.com