Re: [PULL] seccomp update (next)

[James Morris]

On Mon, 1 Dec 2014, Kees Cook wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 2:56 PM, James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, 1 Dec 2014, Kees Cook wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 3:37 PM, James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> > That would be because your tree is based on v3.17 and Kees' is based on
> >> >> > v3.18-rc6 ...
> >> >>
> >> >> James, I can base on whatever you like. I can do v3.17, or even
> >> >> against your security-next. It seems everyone uses something
> >> >> different. :)
> >> >
> >> > It's best to track my next branch as your upstream.
> >>
> >> It'll trigger collisions with what's the x86 -next from luto's
> >> changes. Should I just let Stephen sort that out?
> >
> > Yep.
> 
> Hm, it depends on 54ef6df3f3f1353d99c80c437259d317b2cd1cbd, so basing
> against security-next would make the tree unbuildable. Perhaps I
> should just wait for -rc1 to land first?

Yep, that will work.


-- 
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/