Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:38:07 +0800 | | From | Coywolf Qi Hunt <> | | Subject | Re: "stable" vs "security stable" |
| |
On 10/9/05, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote: > On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 15:44:38 +0800, Coywolf Qi Hunt said: > > On 10/9/05, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote: > > > It is "security stable". Let's take this new notation from now on. > > "Security Stable" doesn't have to be all security related. > > Tell you what - you convince the -stable team, and I'll go along with it.. >
Better be "stable" and "base". 2.6.13.3 is the latest stable, 2.6.13 is the latest base.
> > (you want stable@kernel.org to replace security@kernel.org too?) > > You're the one who called it "security stable" ;)
My fault. I didn't realise stable@kernel.org exist, and CCed the wrong list security@kernel.org.
> > > What you did is so stupid to me to to use -R every time. -R implies > > something wrong, and need to revert. > > Umm... my diff had *lower case* -r (recursive), not -R (revert)...
I mean `patch -R'. -- Coywolf Qi Hunt http://sosdg.org/~coywolf/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |