| 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.LNX.2.00.1107132351390.22281@swampdragon.chaosbits.net> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 23:53:15 +0200 (CEST) From: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net> Subject: Re: Should SUBLEVEL be removed for 3.x ? Linus: ping? Would be nice to get this clarified before 3.0 happens :-) On Mon, 11 Jul 2011, Jesper Juhl wrote: > Hi > > If the plan is that the new kernel is going to be 3.0 (3.x) and the > -stable kernels then get to tack on a third digit with EXTRAVERSION, then > it seems to me that the main Makefile should get rid of SUBLEVEL - or? > > Or is the plan to ditch EXTRAVERSION for -stable kernels and have them use > SUBLEVEL instead? > > There are a few scripts that need fixing if SUBLEVEL goes the way of the > Dodo, but I didn't want to start fixing those without a clear indication > of whether or not SUBLEVEL is going to/should die. > > So what's going to happen to SUBLEVEL/EXTRAVERSION? > > -- Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> http://www.chaosbits.net/ Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please. -- 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