[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] fix warning in tlbex.c for CONFIG_32BIT

To: David Daney <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix warning in tlbex.c for CONFIG_32BIT
From: Ralf Baechle <>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:17:12 +0100
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <>
User-agent: Mutt/
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 08:48:02AM -0700, David Daney wrote:

> Some people on this list are quite adamant that patches be in-line.
> I was trying to see how my mailer (Thunderbird) handled this.  Obviously 
>  (in hindsight) it screws things up.
> Sending as an attachment works well except some mailers (Not 
> Thunderbird) cannot quote attached patches with out jumping through hoops.
> I don't really want to change the mailer that I am using, so I am in a 
> bit of a bind WRT submitting patches here.
> FWIW other mailing lists (binutils, gcc) don't seem to have the same 
> trouble with attached patches.

Maybe a different style of work there.  The submission style we're asking
people to follow here is exactly the same as on linux-kernel, netdev or
other kernel-related lists.

I just asked somebody; this is the answer I got:

  I have never had any luck getting mailers to send patches in a way that
  no one complained about. In the end, I used this

  I found the best way is to have a directory with patches like
  001_part1.patch, 002_part2.patch etc with matching explainations in
  001_part1.mail 002_part2.mail . I have a script that generates the final
  mails and feeds them to sendpatchset

The script may not be what you want but I guess I'll be something like it
to deal with the huge patchsets I'm sometimes fiddling with - like the
452 patch monster right now ...


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>