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.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
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]
