linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc 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:	Mon, 19 Aug 2013 16:57:36 -0400
From:	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	andrew@...n.ch, gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mvebu tree with the arm-soc
 tree

Hi Stephen,

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 04:05:37PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the mvebu tree got conflicts in various files
> between merges and commits in the arm-soc tree and merges in the mvebu
> tree.

I'm afraid I'm a bit lost...

> These merges/commits in the mvebu tree appear to be from a previous
> version of the arm-soc tree that the mvebu tree has been rebased upon.
> Please don't do that - the arm-soc tree as a whole is not stable.

I didn't do anything different from the other times I built for-next.
Could you give me a specific example when you build linux-next again?
I'll certainly try to avoid it in the future, but it'll be easier if I
know what 'it' is. ;-)

I'll not change for-next today, and we'll see how it goes.

thx,

Jason.
--
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/