[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: -mm merge plans for 2.6.20
    On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 20:40 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > mprotect-patch-for-use-by-slim.patch
    > integrity-service-api-and-dummy-provider.patch
    > integrity-service-api-and-dummy-provider-cleanup-use-of-configh.patch
    > integrity-service-api-and-dummy-provider-compilation-warning-fix.patch
    > slim-main-patch.patch
    > slim-main-patch-socket_post_create-hook-return-code.patch
    > slim-main-patch-misc-cleanups-requested-at-inclusion-time.patch
    > slim-main-patch-handle-failure-to-register.patch
    > slim-main-patch-fix-bug-with-mm_users-usage.patch
    > slim-main-patch-security-slim-slm_mainc-make-2-functions-static.patch
    > slim-secfs-patch.patch
    > slim-secfs-patch-slim-correct-use-of-snprintf.patch
    > slim-secfs-patch-cleanup-use-of-configh.patch
    > slim-make-and-config-stuff.patch
    > slim-make-and-config-stuff-makefile-fix.patch
    > slim-debug-output.patch
    > slim-fix-security-issue-with-the-task_post_setuid-hook.patch
    > slim-secfs-inode-i_private-build-fix.patch
    > slim-documentation.patch
    > fdtable-make-fdarray-and-fdsets-equal-in-size-slim.patch
    > Shall hold in -mm.

    Why? I haven't seen any evidence that prior review comments have been
    addressed so far, and a fresh patch set would be beneficial anyway to
    facilitate full review of the updated code and to allow them to fix
    their patch descriptions as well (as they were wrong in some instances,
    describing older versions of the code).

    Stephen Smalley
    National Security Agency

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-12-08 15:19    [W:0.020 / U:13.184 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site