From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932304AbWDRUjw (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:39:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932329AbWDRUjw (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:39:52 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:27092 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932304AbWDRUjv (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:39:51 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 13:39:00 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Greg KH Cc: tytso@mit.edu, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] Fixes in the -stable tree, but not in mainline Message-Id: <20060418133900.5e09cb23.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20060418174205.GA684@suse.de> References: <20060417212946.GA3118@kroah.com> <20060418160610.GA10933@thunk.org> <20060418174205.GA684@suse.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Greg KH 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.