linux-kernel - Re: linux-kbuild.git

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: <4B0F9F0D.6010601@suse.cz>
Date:	Fri, 27 Nov 2009 10:42:37 +0100
From:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
	Aníbal Monsalve Salazar 
	<anibal@...ian.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-kbuild.git

On 27.11.2009 05:22, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Michal,
> 
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:37:50 +0100 Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:26:09PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
>>>
>>> I went through the patches posted to linux-kbuild and picked those that
>>> were easy enough to review, looked safe and worked for me. I also took
>>> Sam's series from kbuild-next.git, but I didn't really review it yet, so
>>> there is no signoff from me (TBD). The repo is at
>>>
>>>   git://repo.or.cz/linux-kbuild.git for-next
>>
>> Looks good.
>> Good to see you picked up some of the patches that were pending.
>>
>> Stephen - please replace my kbuild trees with this.
> 
> I have replaced this from today.

Thanks!


>  Do you intend to run the equivalent of
> the kbuild-current tree (bug fixes for the current release while they are
> waiting to go to Linus)?  I have removed the kbuild-current tree for now
> since the only commit in it is in the new kbuild tree.

I plan to maintain such a branch, but I thought I would base the
for-next branch on top of it, so that you get everything in one pack. Or
would you still prefer to have two kbuild branches in linux-next, so
that you can remove the for-next branch if necessary and keep the
for-current branch? Just tell me what fits you best.



> Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.  As
> you may know, this is not a judgment of your code.  The purpose of
> linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of
> conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window. 
> 
> You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have
> been:
>      * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's
> 	Signed-off-by,
>      * posted to the relevant mailing list,
>      * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree),
>      * successfully unit tested, and 
>      * destined for the current or next Linux merge window.
> 
> Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
> to fetch).  It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary.

OK, will keep that in mind.

Michal
--
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/