| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20130819205736.GA13964@titan.lakedaemon.net> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists