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: <20170914053437.GA15810@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Wed, 13 Sep 2017 22:34:37 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Tom Gall <tom.gall@...aro.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>, patches@...nelci.org,
        Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>,
        linux- stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/14] 4.9.50-stable review

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 04:18:03AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 02:30:46PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > Yes. I don't recall if it is a direct --force or if you would have to
> > > remove the original tag first (with git push <repo> :refs/tags/<tag>).
> > 
> > Ah, but then if someone had pulled the old tag, they would have to
> > delete it locally before they can pull in the new one.  That's the main
> > reason I'll not do this...
> 
> In fact not, the tags are automatically replaced upon pull. I've been
> using such a crappy workflow for some time in the past, sharing human
> errors with coworkers... Git is pretty tolerant to this. It's just
> that it's terribly confusing because you can then have two people with
> the same tag name pointing to different commit IDs, I really hate this,
> it only works when all users are in the same office and you shout
> "sorry I messed up, I'm pushing the tag again".
> 
> > Again, use the make command that we have just for this reason...
> 
> It also has the benefit of always reporting the same version for all
> users including those only downloading the -rc patch.
> 
It reports the same version, but it is not necessarily the same code.
There are cases where a rc is updated, but not the Makefile. That happens
quite a lot, actually. This is similar to mainline, which currently
claims to be v4.13.0 until -rc1, then it claims to be -rc1 until -rc2,
and so on.

Guenter

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ