linux-kernel - linux-next: merge of the arm tree into the at91 tree

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20120127093619.f2c90c6aa8b542134a157956@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:36:19 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	"Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD" <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: linux-next: merge of the arm tree into the at91 tree

Hi all,

I noticed that the for-next branch of the arm tree has been merged into
the at91 tree.  My understanding (and Russell, please correct me if I am
wrong) is that the for-next branch is *not* stable and may be rebased.
This will cause all sorts of problems in linux-next in the future (and
also when Russell or the arm=soc guys merge the at91 tree into theirs).

In fact, I am going to have problems today as Russell has already rebase
his for-next branch.  :-(

I assume that the merge was done to fix some conflicts or pick up some
functionality that is in Russell's tree.  This should be done by merging
topic branch(es) of that tree that Russell has explicitly said are stable.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped