Bug 7052 - branch upstream-only runtime code
Summary: branch upstream-only runtime code
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: systemtap
Classification: Unclassified
Component: runtime (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Unassigned
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: 7042
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2008-11-25 17:57 UTC by Masami Hiramatsu
Modified: 2010-09-07 19:20 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Host:
Target:
Build:
Last reconfirmed:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Masami Hiramatsu 2008-11-25 17:57:07 UTC
I think we could branch git tree only for upstream kernel. that is good for
upstream kernel developers.

In this branch, we should;
- remove all autoconf-*.
- use new kernel functions/macros.

Then, it could be easy to port upstream kernel.
Comment 1 Frank Ch. Eigler 2008-11-25 18:01:23 UTC
> I think we could branch git tree only for upstream kernel.

But which upstream kernel exactly?
How many of these branches should we maintain and/or distribute with systemtap?
Comment 2 Masami Hiramatsu 2008-11-25 18:07:19 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> But which upstream kernel exactly?

I think the latest -rc is good enough.

> How many of these branches should we maintain and/or distribute with systemtap?

Just one branch is enough, and update that code against the latest kernel.
It's a kind of launch-pad for upstream code merging.
Comment 3 Srikar Dronamraju 2008-11-27 16:28:41 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> 
> Just one branch is enough, and update that code against the latest kernel.
> It's a kind of launch-pad for upstream code merging.
> 
 I think just having one branch is a good idea. But we could keep tagging it to
the kernel versions in the same branch so that a person trying to use a previous
 kernel would still have a way to use this branch (if and only if the latest
systemtap at that time wouldn't work on a previous kernel)
Comment 4 Frank Ch. Eigler 2010-09-07 19:20:55 UTC
This is unlikely in the near term.