Re: linux-next: the selinux tree needs cleaning up

[James Morris]

On 06/25/2014 09:59 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 14:03:08 -0400 Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Friday, June 20, 2014 12:06:28 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> >
> > {big snip}
> >
> > > Stephen, assuming for a moment that I created a fresh branch, based against
> > > 3.15, and then added the SELinux patches for 3.16 (basically the few new
> > > patches that were in the ole #next branch) would that serve as a reasonable
> > > basis for a new SELinux #next branch?  Around the -rc5/6/7 timeframe I would
> > > send a pull request to James to pull from this next branch into the Linux
> > > Security branch for 3.17.  Once 3.16 is released, I would merge that into
> > > this new #next branch and continue with the next round of patches.
> > >
> > > FYI, more or less, the above is the process we've settled upon for all of
> > > the trees that get accumulated into the Linux Security tree.
> >
> > Does the above work for you in linux-next?  I'd like to try and resolve this
> > sooner rather than later and I imagine you feel the same ...
>
> Well, I see that James has pulled your tree, so past problems are now
> moot. He has some duplicate commits in his tree now and Linus will get
> a few more when he next pulls James' tree.  We just need to avoid this
> going forward.  And given that James or Serge will, from now on, *pull*
> your tree (not cherry-pick from it), things should be fine.

I haven't pulled in Paul's tree, I merged with the latest Linus release.
--
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/