linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 0/7] kbuild: move scripts/basic/docproc.c to scripts/docproc.c

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]

Date:	Sat, 30 Apr 2011 01:00:09 +0200
From:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>
To:	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>
Cc:	pefoley2@...izon.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/7] kbuild: move scripts/basic/docproc.c to scripts/docproc.c

On 30.4.2011 00:46, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 18:38:12 -0400 Peter Foley wrote:
> 
>> This patchset moves scripts/basic/docproc to scripts/docproc.
>> This causes docproc to only be built for *doc targets rather than every
>> time the kernel is compiled.
>>
>> Patches also attached as requested by Michal Marek.
> 
> 
> That's disappointing (the attachments).  Why was this requested?
> 
> See Documentation/CodingStyle, section 7:
> 
> "No MIME, no links, no compression, no attachments.  Just plain text."

and a couple of lines later:
"Exception:  If your mailer is mangling patches then someone may ask
you to re-send them using MIME."

Which is exactly what happened here - the patches had missing or excess
leading space and in some cases a context line was missing. So instead
of manually reconstructing the patches, I asked Peter to resend them as
attachments.

BUT - I didn't request to split this patch into seven pieces. Splitting
patches into smaller parts is desired, but each part has to be self
contained and not break stuff when the later parts are not applied. So
when moving a .c file, then the corespoding Makefile changes need to be
contained in the same patch. No need to resend the patch now, I'll fold
the patches into one again, but please consider this next time.

> Instead, the saved file contains lines like
> this (below) and each patch 2 times (inline and attachment).

Yeah, only sending the attachment would be better in this case.

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/