Re: Linux 188.8.131.52
From: Matt Mackall
Date: Wed Mar 09 2005 - 18:44:45 EST
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 03:11:57PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> 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 184.108.40.206.
> > > 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 kernel.org places:
> > > kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/patch-220.127.116.11.gz
> > > which is a patch against the 18.104.22.168 release.
> > Argh! @*#$&!!&!
> > > If consensus arrives
> > > that this patch should be against the 2.6.11 tree, it will be done that
> > > way in the future.
> > Consensus arrived back when 22.214.171.124 came out.
> It did? So, what was it agreed to be? Any pointers to that agreement?
Deltas against 2.6.x tarballs. The discussion was some large fraction
of the 126.96.36.199 announce thread. I think someone else mentioned it in
the recent renumbering thread, so I didn't feel the need to
pre-emptively whinge this time around..
> > Fixing it in the future is too #*$%* 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.
That'd make things easier, yes.
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
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/