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: <20111114.004452.1996002974515474262.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 00:44:52 -0500 (EST) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: matti.vaittinen@....com Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RESUBMITTED net-next 1/2] IPv6 - support for NLM_F_* flags at IPv6 routing requests The subject lines are completely identical in patches #1 and #2. How in the world is someone scanning the commit header lines going to be able to tell what's different about one change vs. the other? Please correc this and resubmit. -- 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