| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004270831430.3739@i5.linux-foundation.org> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:31:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> cc: linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] omap fixes for v2.6.34-rc5 On Mon, 26 Apr 2010, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > Please pull omap fixes from: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap-2.6.git omap-fixes-for-linus I pulled it this time, but I'm starting to get really irritated with you. These look like real fixes, but quite frankly, by -rc5, that IS NOT ENOUGH. They need to be _regressions_, not just cleanups and fixes for things that have never worked. And this is starting to be a pattern with the omap tree: you're not honoring the merge window properly. Just "it's a bug-fix" or "it's deleting unused code" is not enough. The point of the late -rc series is to fix problems from the merge window, not add new changes. I realize that you think that all the new changes are obviously good, but the fact is, bugs happen even in "obvious bug-fixes". And that's why we have the rule about late-rc pulls being about _regressions_ and/or major oopses/security issues. Not just random development that are meant to improve things. Linus -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists