Re: [PATCH v2 1a/10] sysdeps/tile support

[Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf at tilera dot com>]

On 12/3/2011 7:02 PM, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 11/20/2011 12:06 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> I see these patches haven't been committed yet ... as far as I can tell 
>> you don't yet have a sourceware account, so you should request one for the 
>> glibc project using the form at 
>> <http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/pdw/ps_form.cgi>.
>>
>> ports uses separate ChangeLog files for each port (this is probably a 
>> relic of the CVS days where there were actual ACLs restricting who could 
>> commit to which ports).  The Tile ports should probably use ChangeLog.tile 
>> for their changes; the asm-generic code, maybe ChangeLog.linux-generic.
> I tried to commit both sysdeps/tile (and sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/tile), and
> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/generic, with the matching new ChangeLog.tile and
> ChangeLog.linux-generic files, but I got errors like these:
>
> **** Access denied: cmetcalf in ports/sysdeps/tile on HEAD
> cvs commit: Pre-commit check failed
>
> I think I have things set up correctly on my end, so perhaps there's just a
> tweak needed on the server to give me write permission to those three
> hierarchies (and the associated top-level ChangeLog.* files)?

On the other hand, maybe I am confused.  I was assuming that CVS was still
the primary vehicle for managing glibc, and the git repository was just
shadowing it.  But I see that if I "git pull" and "cvs update" I get more
recent changes in git than I do in CVS.

So if I make my changes in git, should I ask someone to pull my tree (like
how Linux is managed) or do I push my changes directly to the master git
repository?  I haven't used the latter workflow before, so if someone has
some notes on what the right thing to do is, I'd appreciate it.  Thanks!

-- 
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com