> > This four-line patch provides a means for listing what patches have been
> > built into a kernel. This will help track non-standard kernel versions,
> > such as those released by Redhat, or Alan's ac series, etc. more easily.
>
> I just want to second this. I think it is very usefull to list
> patches: we are approaching stable series and there are lots of
> patches for stable series.
Unfortunately, this has probably come up way too late for 2.2, which is a
shame because that's precisely where it's valuable. Maybe all the
distribution vendors will pick it up independently. :) My patch that
builds .config into the kernel (I'll post it later today after I test it a
bit) stands a couple orders of magnitude less chance, though it has quite
a bit more diagnostic value.
> Perhaps searching only Documentation/ tree would be sufficient? (After
> all, description of patch is just form of documentation, don't you
> think?)
I thought about a couple different schemes for the name files. Another is
having a special directory for them, which is nice as it allows you to do
away with the name prefix and the nasty sed pipe (or Makefile hackery).
But I think there's some value to having them in the top-level where
you're less likely to miss them when you do a build. Unless you're Alan or
Linus and are constantly merging patches, this won't be a problem, as
you'll probably have no more than a few of these.
-- "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/