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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 17:01:29 -0700 From: Micah Morton <mortonm@...omium.org> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] SafeSetID changes for v5.10 On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 4:06 PM Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > > These were rebased since the merge window started, for no apparent reason. > > Were they in linux-next? Yeah, they are changes that were originally targeting the v5.9 merge window (and thus were in -next during July/August) but I didn't get the chance to send a pull request for them. Since I didn't touch my -next branch since then they are also in 'next-20201013' and 'next-20201015'. I just rebased to v5.9 to make sure the 1-line changes that touch kernel/capability.c, kernel/groups.c and kernel/sys.c still applied cleanly without conflicts. Should I have rebased onto one of the -rc's for v5.9 instead? > > And if so, why was I sent some different version? > > Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists