netdev - Re: [patch 0/2] af_iucv patches for linux-2.6.31

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20090619.001103.186026755.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Fri, 19 Jun 2009 00:11:03 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	schwidefsky@...ibm.com
Cc:	ubraun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, ursula.braun@...ibm.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	heiko.carstens@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] af_iucv patches for linux-2.6.31

From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:04:26 +0200

> Hi David,
> 
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:19:57 -0700 (PDT)
> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> 
>> From: Ursula Braun <ubraun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:44:54 +0200
>> 
>> > sorry, I did a git pull on linux-2.6.git first, and the af_iucv patches
>> > applied cleanly on my system.
>> 
>> It couldn't have applied to Linus's tree because all the IUCV
>> bits you submitted to me for 2.6.31 are in his tree and that is
>> what created the conflicts.
> 
> Now I am confused. I just tested the two patches Uschi sent with todays
> upstream tree. The patches apply fine. Where is the problem, wrong tree?

Weird, I just retried and they do apply cleanly.

I have no idea what happened, sorry.

They are in my tree now, thanks.
--
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