linux-kernel - Re: m68k libc5 regression

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sun, 1 Jun 2008 12:34:37 +0200
From:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux/m68k <linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: m68k libc5 regression

On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 02:41:05AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 11:22:05 +0200 Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 01:48:24AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 10:37:59 +0200 (CEST) Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > I shall merge this fix into my tree (y'know - the one where memory
> > > > > management patches are hosted) and I'll get it into 2.6.26 and shall
> > > > > offer it to the -stable team.  This will cause me to get collisions
> > > > > with the duplicated patch in linux-next but fortunately it is small. 
> > > > > This time.
> > > > 
> > > > So what's the appropriate way to handle this?
> > > 
> > > Well at least please reply letting people know what's happening with it.
> > > 
> > > Ask me to merge it and remind me that it's needed in -stable.  Or just
> > > send the thing to Linus and -stable immediately.
> > 
> > I recall adding:
> > Cc: stable@...nel.org
> > 
> > will automagically tell the stable team when this is
> > merged and that it is a -stable candidate.
> > 
> 
> Yup.  Except I always use the <> wrappers around the email address.  In
> fact my scripts require that (and probably shouldn't).  We don't seem
> very consistent with that.

Email addresses are often verbatim copied from MAINTAINERS
where we not yet have proper format (no <>).
So relying on <> in Cc: is not good.

For stable on 20 where without <> since 2.6.20 compered to
291 with <>.

	Sam
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/