Re: [PATCH 1/8] Revert commit 8827c288feb7810185aa7c2e37537202fc709869

[Li Zefan]

Paul Menage wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Li Zefan<lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> It's sure that reverting this commit makes things easier, but
>> rebasing this patchset shouldn't be hard. And this doesn't
>> sound a good reason to revert an innocent commit.
>>
> 
> The problem is that Ben's patch set starts with a patch that adds the
> "procs" file, and then a patch that fixes the namespace bug, and he
> and you used different names for variables/functions even though you
> were doing essentially the same thing. So rebasing would involve
> pretty much entirely rewriting the first patch and ditching the second
> - not just a case of fixing up some merge conflicts.
> 

Here we reintroduce the bug, and re-fix it with the essentially
same solution, this lazy way doesn't sound right to me.

As you said, the 2 patches differ just in using different var/func
names, so rebasing shouldn't be hard but maybe a bit boring.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/