Re: Linux

From: Greg KH
Date: Wed Mar 09 2005 - 23:40:20 EST

On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 01:06:31PM -0800, 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! @*#$&!!&!
> > If consensus arrives
> > that this patch should be against the 2.6.11 tree, it will be done that
> > way in the future.
> Consensus arrived back when came out.

It did? So, what was it agreed to be? Any pointers to that agreement?

> 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. is now in the proper place, sorry for any inconvience that
caused. This happened yesterday.

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

No, I can always respin the patch, and re-release it if it's a problem.


greg k-h
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