lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 26 Apr 2018 09:56:21 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net-next
 tree

On 04/26/2018 02:49 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/.gitignore
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   0abf854d7cbb ("selftests: bpf: update .gitignore with missing generated files")
> 
> from the net-next tree and commit:
> 
>   b6fd9cf796e6 ("selftests: bpf: update .gitignore with missing file")
> 
> from the bpf-next tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.

Looks good, thanks!

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ