linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: first tree

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20080221012332.dc1948ac.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Thu, 21 Feb 2008 01:23:32 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: first tree

Hi Andy,

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:04:36 +0000 Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org> wrote:
>
> As devout believers in testing things early we test -mm and -git releases
> as they drop.  I am keen that we are able to continue this with the -next
> tree once it gets going.  Having just pulled this tree its not obvious how
> I would communicate which tree I had tested.  I guess we could use the
> SHA1 of the actual head used, but that really is cumbersome for the poor
> people who have to check the results and actually report things to lkml.

I hope I have addressed this issue by tagging each tree with its date
i.e. todays was next-20080220.

> Also will you be producing any tarballs for these releases?  If so I
> would say they would definatly need to be against some common base, like
> against the nearest official tag "below".

I hadn't considered tarballs, but I will give it some thought.

Thanks for your thoughts.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped