On Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 04:36:03PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Feb 09, 2002 13:41 -0800, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > We don't, but we can, and we should. "bk relink tree1 tree2" seems like
> > the right interface.
>
> Yes, this would be great. It should probably only do this for files in
> SCCS and BitKeeper directories, because vim (for example) will do the
Correct.
> One thing that I've noticed (got my first linux-2.5 clone last night) is
> that the kernel build process is somewhat broken by the fact that not
> everything that you need to build is checked out of the repository by
> make.
>
> It appears to handle .c files ok, but it failed for all of the .h files.
This is because the dependencies are incorrect in the makefiles. If you
have correct dependencies in the makefiles, make will do the right thing.
One alternative would be to have a scripts/bk-get which takes as an arg
the architecture[s] you want and gets the files that make sense for
that architecture. That would help somewhat.
-- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 15 2002 - 21:00:29 EST