linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit tree with Linus' 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1397650080.2725.3.camel@localhost>
Date:	Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:08:00 -0400
From:	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit tree with Linus' tree

On Wed, 2014-04-16 at 14:02 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> You could have avoided this by doing a fast forward merge of v3.15-rc1
> instead of the v3.14 merge (since everything in your tree before that
> merge was also in Linus' tree by v3.15-rc1).

This is a situation I've never really known the right way to handle.  I
certainly could/can fast forward to 3.15-rc1, but then I have a random
crap development base for the audit tree.  Which is especially bad sine
-rc1 doesn't even boot on my main machine.

What I've always done is to merge the last release right after the pull
and go from there, but it clearly leaves conflict potential

Which is preferred?  I've always enjoyed having my trees based on a
release....

--
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/