Re: Linux

From: Randy.Dunlap
Date: Wed Mar 09 2005 - 16:29:44 EST

Matt Mackall wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 12:39:23AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:

And to further test this whole -stable system, I've released
It contains one patch, which is already in the -bk tree, and came from
the security team (hence the lack of the longer review cycle).

It's available now in the normal places:
which is a patch against the release.

Argh! @*#$&!!&!

I have to Argh this also (with Matt).

If consensus arrives
that this patch should be against the 2.6.11 tree, it will be done that
way in the future.

It would be much easier on users/testers to have to apply
only one patch to base (2.6.11 e.g.) to get to 2.6.x.y
( e.g.). One Patch File. Not three.

Consensus arrived back when came out.

Please, folks, there are automated tools that "know" about kernel
release numbering and so on. Said tools broke with because it
wasn't in the same place that was and now this breaks with all
precedent by being an interdiff along a branch.

Fixing it in the future is too #*$%* late because you've now turned it
into a special case.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at