linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 00/44] Meta Linux Kernel Port

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]

Message-Id: <20130112000336.1f24c42237fab4fe0c305ff6@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Sat, 12 Jan 2013 00:03:36 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>
Cc:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/44] Meta Linux Kernel Port

Hi James,

On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:15:16 +0000 James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/01/13 23:34, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > You really should not base development work on linux-next and before I
> > can include it there you will need to rebase it onto Linus' tree (or some
> > other tree that does not rebase).  Its OK to test by doing a merge with
> > linux-next ...
> 
> Thanks for the info Stephen. So I suppose if the patchset depended on
> things in -next the normal way to do it would be to merge in the
> individual trees I needed first?

Yep, but please let the maintainers of those trees know that you expect
their tree to not be rebased.  Or, if if they aren't really dependencies
just conflicts, then leave the other tree out and let me and Linus fix
the conflicts when we merge your tree.

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

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped