netdev - Re: [PATCH] bridge: assign random address

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: <20071216153746.aa4f5e72.rdunlap@xenotime.net>
Date:	Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:37:46 -0800
From:	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org,
	berrange@...hat.com, jeff@...zik.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	rjw@...k.pl
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bridge: assign random address

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:26:06 -0800 (PST) David Miller wrote:

> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:29:15 -0800
> 
> > On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 13:37:17 -0800 (PST) David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
> > > Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:48:35 -0800
> > > 
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] bridge: assign random address
> > > 
> > > "bridge" should all-caps and in brackets,
> > 
> > No, "bridge" should not be in [].  Lots of people's patch-receiving scripts
> > assume that any text in [] is to be removed as the patch is committed.  It
> > contains text which is only relevant to the particular email which carried
> > the patch.  Stuff like "patch" and "4/5" and "linux-2.6.23", etc.
> 
> I don't use scripts, I edit it by hand.  And when I do ever use
> scripts I will make sure they accomodate "[$SUBSYSTEM]" format
> subject lines, you can be sure.
> 
> And you can even make those scripts happy by doing:
> 
> [Patch 1/7] [SUBSYSTEM]: Foo bar baz...
> 
> And if you haven't noticed over the past few years, this is
> is the convention we've been using in the networking.
> 
> I munge every one of your (and everyone else's) changelog entry
> headers this way.  Without exception, every single one.
> 
> So when you don't follow this convention, you make more typing
> and more work for me.  The more patches I get from someone
> the more important it is for this convention to be followed.
> 
> I find it very hard to believe that you haven't once looked
> at the hundreds of patches I've applied of your's and not
> noticed how I reformat everything.

I have noticed the difference in networking vs. rest-of-kernel.
Rest-of-kernel generally follows the canonical format in
Documentation/SubmittingPatches:

14) The canonical patch format

The canonical patch subject line is:

    Subject: [PATCH 001/123] subsystem: summary phrase


---
~Randy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html