linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: unneeded merge in the security 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]

Message-ID: <CA+icZUUQMa3avo8HbqyZAjJF0xDTmSE4GXtw2YmypzauunW54g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 12 Mar 2013 10:29:46 +0100
From:	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
To:	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Linus <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: unneeded merge in the security tree

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 03:10:53PM +1100, James Morris wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Mar 2013, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> > The top commit in the security tree today is a merge of v3.9-rc2.  This
>> > is a completely unnecessary merge as the tree before the merge was a
>> > subset of v3.9-rc1 and so if the merge had been done using anything but
>> > the tag, it would have just been a fast forward.  I know that this is now
>> > deliberate behaviour on git's behalf, but isn't there some way we can
>> > make this easier on maintainers who are just really just trying to pick a
>> > new starting point for their trees after a release?  (at least I assume
>> > that is what James was trying to do)
>>
>> Yes, and I was merging to a tag as required by Linus.
>
> Why not just force the head of the security tree to be v3.9-rc2?  Then
> you don't end up creating a completely unnecessary merge commit, and
> users who were at the previous head of the security tree will
> experience a fast forward when they pull your new head.
>

If maintainers of their for-next trees switch to latest -rcX
(Linus-tree) as base, life would get a lot of easier.

That's what I am doing here before any build:
Take the latest available -rcX of Linus-tree and then pull in
Linux-Next GIT into it.
( Even if Stephen's "origin" GIT branch (Linus-tree) is post-rcX. )

That strategy makes merging a bit easier (for me).

- Sedat -

>                                                   - Ted
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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/