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: <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