[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:0.332 / U:1.232 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site