Re: pre-release2.1.0

Michael Driscoll (fenris@lightspeed.net)
Thu, 26 Sep 1996 10:10:20 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: M Shariful Anam: "Re: Money (was Re: test version of 2.1.0 available (fwd)) (fwd)"
Previous message: Andrew C. Esh: "Re: test version of 2.1.0 available (fwd)"
Maybe in reply to: Russell Berry: "pre-release2.1.0"

>first, I applied pre-patch2.1.0, then tried pre-patch2.1.0#2[34] and kept getting
>complaints about a previously applied patch, so I figured #4 was a compilation of
>changes of the prior, thus applying it directly to 2.0.21 tree. Was that right?

Yes, it was. An easy way to check would be to look at the patch and see
where it patches the version number in Makefile. For example, the #4
patch has:

--- lx2.0/v2.0.21/linux/Makefile Fri Sep 20 17:00:33 1996
+++ linux/Makefile Mon Sep 23 17:53:37 1996
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
VERSION = 2
-PATCHLEVEL = 0
-SUBLEVEL = 21
+PATCHLEVEL = 1
+SUBLEVEL = 0

ARCH = i386

Indicating that it is a patch for 2.0.21 - 2.1.0.
Mike Driscoll
<fenris@lightspeed.net>

Next message: M Shariful Anam: "Re: Money (was Re: test version of 2.1.0 available (fwd)) (fwd)"
Previous message: Andrew C. Esh: "Re: test version of 2.1.0 available (fwd)"
Maybe in reply to: Russell Berry: "pre-release2.1.0"