On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 07:49:20AM +0000, Nix wrote:
> Well, personally I handle patch-application in cp -al'ed trees by doing
> cp -al via a script, and repatching all currently hardlinked trees
> (obviously if they are very divergent some patches will fail and I'll
> have to fix them up by hand).
... then you edit a file to fix a typo, and have a _nice_ day next Friday
when you notice that stuff got out of sync.
> It works for me well enough to keep hardlinked branches going for in
> some cases years without problems.
>
> (On top of that, I've sometimes considered a switch to patch(1) that
> switches to truncate-and-rewrite rather than unlink-and-replace. Haven't
> implemented it yet though.)
>
>
> (And if you're using this to maintain development branches, then you
> have resync and conflict-management problems *anyway*, which this makes
> no worse.)
Yes, but it's easier to deal with when the number of your repositories
doesn't get multiplied by factor of 20 or so...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
