Re: linux-next: manual merge of the security-testing tree with Linus'tree

[James Morris]

On Fri, 22 May 2009, Al Viro wrote:

> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 03:29:01PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi James,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the security-testing tree got a conflict in
> > fs/exec.c between commits a44ddbb6d8a8ffe4e34e417048dfdd8f3dd1de4f ("Make
> > open_exec() and sys_uselib() use may_open(), instead of duplicating its
> > parts") and 6e8341a11eb21826b7192d0bb88cb5b44900a9af ("Switch open_exec()
> > and sys_uselib() to do_open_filp()") from Linus' tree and commit
> > b9fc745db833bbf74b4988493b8cd902a84c9415 ("integrity: path_check update")
> > from the security-testing tree.
> > 
> > I used the version of these conflicts from Linus' tree as I assume that
> > the changes to may_open() from the latter patch are sufficient.  Please
> > check and let me know (or merge Linus' tree and do the resolution for
> > yourself :-)).
> 
> Just drop their changes to sys_uselib() and open_exec() and keep the
> rest of their patch.

I've merged Linus' tree into mine and done the above, see fs/exec.c in 
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jmorris/security-testing-2.6#next

(I don't know how to get the conflict resolution diff out of git).


- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@xxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/