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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2007 08:17:24 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <>
To:	coly <>
Cc:	linux-ext4 <>
Subject: Re: which tree should I generate the ext4 patch ?

On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 05:00:43PM +0800, coly wrote:
> These days, I am tring to post my patch for inode reservation on
> linux-ext4. But I am confused on which tree I should generate the patch.
> I worked on mm-tree. But now Thoedore creates a tree for ext4, so should
> I generate the patch based on tso-tree ?

The mm-tree is fed from the ext4 patch series, so there shouldn't be
much difference.

> Same question to e2fsprogs. I guess maybe I should generate the patch
> for e2fsprogs based on e2fsprogs-TEST branch, a.k.a 1.40-WIP-0407. Isn't
> it ?

Yes, or if you want to use the very latest, you can use the Mercurial
repository located at:

I will be switch to git at some point in the near future, probably
after the e2fsprogs 1.40 release, but for now that's the place to get
the very latest.  

In practice, it's not hard to rebase patches, but patches against the
more recent versions are definitely appreciated.  So if you're not
familiar with using Mercurial, please feel free to use the
1.40-WIP-0407 as the base for your patches.  


					- Ted
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists