Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 12:06:10PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 02:29:46PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > Here are 5 patches that are in the -stable tree, yet not currently fixed
> > > in your mainline tree. One of them is a security fix, so it probably
> > > would be a good idea to get it into there :)
> >
> > I thought one of the requirements for accepting a patch into -stable
> > was that it was already in mainline. Was this a change in policy that
> > I missed, or just an oversight when we vetted these patches?
> >
> > Not that I have anything against these patches, just curious in the
> > future if we should NACK patches proposed for -stable if we notice
> > that they aren't yet in mainline.
>
> Sometimes some of these patches don't make it into Linus's tree because
> they get lost in the shuffle (like the Kconfig one), or because they
> were security issues that hit -stable first (like another one in there).
>
> Either way, yes, the rule is that it should be in mainline, or in the
> pipe to get into mainline (as was the 5 in this patchset.) I just
> wanted to make sure they made it into there, and didn't get lost.
>
I had them queued up as well, but I'm being sluggish and Greg got there first.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
