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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181127115246.00967523@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Tue, 27 Nov 2018 11:52:46 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the vfs tree

Hi Paul,

Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in:

  security/selinux/hooks.c

between commit:

  0472421f47a9 ("vfs: Remove unused code after filesystem context changes")

from the vfs tree and commit:

  2cbdcb882f97 ("selinux: always allow mounting submounts")

from the selinux tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed the function updated by the latter -
I am not sure if there are further changes necessary) and can carry the
fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned,
but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream
maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may also want
to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to
minimise any particularly complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ