linux-kernel - Re: 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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:56:26 +0100
From:	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
CC:	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: merge of the arm tree into the at91 tree

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/26/2012 11:36 PM, Stephen Rothwell :
> 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.

Yes, I was anticipating a stable branch from Russell and never should
have pushed into a branch that would have gone to linux-next: My
mistake, sorry.

Note that my intention was not to use this branch or one based on
rmk/for-next in any "pull request". It was just a hint for people that
wanted to work on at91 for 3.4...

So, Stephen, can I ask you to remove the at91-next branch from your
pull list. For the moment we can rely on arm-soc guys to experiment
our changes in linux-next. It may be simpler for everyone.

thanks for your understanding, best regards,
- -- 
Nicolas Ferre
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPInTFAAoJEAf03oE53VmQ01UIALIkAxoj3Oxou45+Ts0hjqCk
ddQpqXsoZt44B/b+M+b2wPKK+stmjAVXT8KQJporgckmJyatc/H3BOdaCw5a4rGR
PPrBjEZRx+cH6IXnzII2b73MkdvmKrICOlKpcuIlJiXPcpWet0J1K4lmMWxDPC2D
zGeTFMqqUYMOxxADtRZhsHo/ryZivtaZf9LfYS5pYc7u4vhqjkCt8q07NabgIRaL
GpfyXSLFl30Sqx53Di6DLr0OUUmHGPvjDj1xR3yqdeXtO9vpoiwZequlVX+PYboL
S6OUPYjrDy8uRTNNkz1X8erruOx/y0T87/l4SHt28Aoz9p9sobcykcyRqQyHGJw=
=YhKe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
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/