Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 26 Apr 2021 14:31:18 +0200
From:      Ulrich =?utf-8?B?U3DDtnJsZWlu?= <uqs@freebsd.org>
To:        Mark Johnston <markj@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-git@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: vendor/illumos merges
Message-ID:  <YIaylowIagDlIDxe@acme.spoerlein.net>
In-Reply-To: <YIXeykRtkATGGOd4@nuc>
References:  <YIM7iaptOgsWyxse@nuc> <YIP2mE%2B0lKB8pLTK@acme.spoerlein.net> <YIQ0ilbqOM4/cTE4@nuc> <YIV2bqPnzX0faSMo@acme.spoerlein.net> <YIXeykRtkATGGOd4@nuc>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2021-04-25 at 17:27:38 -0400, Mark Johnston wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 04:02:22PM +0200, Ulrich Spörlein wrote:
>> I don't think you want a subtree merge, especially as things are
>> scattered all over the place. Also note that none of this subtree magic
>> is in any way recorded in the git data, all it does is help you with the
>> 3-way merges (or whatever).
>>
>> So I would do:
>> - import whatever you need into contrib/foo, commit normally.
>> - munge /usr/src to have every kernel and userland stuff (not sure what
>> other merge tools exist, just make sure to copy over file deletions as
>> well :). You could rsync --del two times with the right source/dest
>> pairs, or export a diff/patch from step 1 and apply it under the right
>> prefixes. test, test, test.
>> - write out this tree to git using: git write-tree
>> - then commit this using: git commit-tree -m "my message" -p HEAD -p
>> origin/vendor/illumos <tree hash from previous command>
>> - bump main to point to that hash using git update-ref
>> - git log --graph and inspect the hell out of this
>> - git push, then curse that we disallow merge commits and you need to
>> `git pull --rebase` to advance to the latest published head and that
>> might mess up your merge commit pretty bad :(
>
>Thanks, I'll give this a try.  I need to make quite a few changes to
>various base system files not included in the import, makefiles mainly.
>Presumably these changes should be included in the merge commit?

I think so. If all the changes are supposed to be visible to clients 
(and CI infrastructure) in one go, then 1 visible commit for this on 
main seems to make the most sense.

Let me know if you need further help in wrangling the state of your 
checkout into a sensible commit :)

Cheers
Uli



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YIaylowIagDlIDxe>