[MythDora] Autoloading modules in 2.6.20
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Sun Mar 25 11:37:21 CEST 2007
On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 11:43:58PM -0400, gchris wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 07:02:15PM -0400, Dennis Hand wrote:
> >>> You don't need to use subversion, just get the packages from
> >>> bleeding. Just be aware that you need to backup the database if you
> >>> want to return to 0.20.
> >> I'm going with what Chris said, I thought trunk was SVN also. What's
> >> the difference between SVN and bleeding? Which one is more bleeding
> >> edge?
> > OK, let me explain: svn is just what mythtv uses to manage the
> > source. There are three relevant "branches" in there:
> > o release: same as the release tarballs
> > o 20-fixes: the stable fixes
> > o trunk: development towards the next mythtv release
> > Often when people say "use mythtv from svn" they really mean "from
> > trunk". Technically all ATrpms' packages are "from svn", as they
> > always have XX-fixes inside.
> > Now to ATrpms' side: In stable you will find the second from the list
> > above, e.g. 20-fixes packages. These are just the release plus
> > important, non-stabilizing patches.
> > Next there is ATrpms' bleeding which just packages from trunk:
> > http://atrpms.net/name/mythtv-trunk/
> > So you can easily test the trunk w/o using svn yourself and compiling
> > etc. Just backup your database, point your yum to atrpms-bleeding and
> > yum update. Undoing this means to uninstall all 0.21 mythtv packages
> > and pulling back in from atrpms-stable. Rather easy if you have the
> > bandwidth (or have a local copy of the packages).
> > So the mapping is
> > svn repo | ATrpms
> > ==============|============================
> > pure release | stable (only the very first days before and XX-fixes
> > | apear)
> > 20-fixes | stable (as soon as it is populated in svn)
> > trunk | bleeding
> My grandkids are in bed now so I've got time for a quick comment but I'm
> still not going to try this till Monday.
> As best as I understand Axel, he wants me to stuff a Mythtv .21 RPM into
> my almost working MythTV .20 (probably breaking the database) to see if
> the code in the .21 RPM corrects the channel scan problem. There is a
> 155 level RPM in there for Mythtv-setup.
> The part I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that Axel (at
> least implies) that his STABLE branch, which I used to build this
> system, already has SVN fixes in it.
> Yet the guy who claims to have solved the channel scanning problem,
> did so by building from SVN fixes.
In that case forget about the trunk packages.
> So are we talking about fixes released since Axel built his ATrpms?
Sounds so. It depends on when the user built from 20-fixes (e.g. what
svn revision he used). You can see when I did by using
rpm -q --changelog mythtv-suite | head -2
* Wed Mar 14 2007 Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net> - 0.20-154
- Update to latest svn fixes (13045).
So it's using a 10 days old 20-fixes branch from revisions 13045.
> And if that's the case wouldn't Subversion identify those changes?
> Now I'm going to bed and ponder why every profession has to have it's
> own language? ;)
To add to the confusion: The revision tag just gives an internal
timeline code. If someone says he's "using svn revision XXX" he still
hasn't said whether it's from the trunk or 20-fixes (usually w/o any
further context the trunk is implied).
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/mythdora/attachments/20070325/8b5b37a9/attachment-0001.bin
More information about the mythdora