Re: [GIT PATCH] Fixes in the -stable tree, but not in mainline

[Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>]

Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> 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.