On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 16:36 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote:
In this particular case, it's my patch, and I've never sent you a pull
request. I sort of assumed that secur...@kernel.org magically caused
acknowledged
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Linus Torvalds
torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
Ok, I'll take your patch-series rather than the recent pull from Andy,
and pick up #2 that way too.
Hmm. In fact, #2 doesn't apply cleanly. It's trivial to fix up, but
rather than do that, the reject made me
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Eric Paris epa...@redhat.com wrote:
No, it's good to blame me. I was trying to deal with it as fast as I
could since I was already trying to ignore my computer before I got
married last weekend and took the last week off. I realized when I got
back yesterday
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:09:58PM -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
From: Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net
Fixes an easy DoS and possible information disclosure.
This does nothing about the broken state of x32 auditing.
eparis: If the admin has enabled auditd and has specifically loaded audit
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:09:58PM -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
From: Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net
Fixes an easy DoS and possible information disclosure.
This does nothing about the broken state of x32 auditing.
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:35:02PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:09:58PM -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
From: Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net
Fixes an easy DoS and possible information
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Linus Torvalds
torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote:
Hmm. It seems that it didn't make it into Linus' tree. Crap.
I assume that if there is a maintainer who normally sends me stuff by
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote:
Hmm. It seems that it didn't make it into Linus' tree. Crap.
I assume that if there is a maintainer who normally sends me stuff by
git, when I see patches in emails they are just informational
heads-ups about stuff
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:35:02PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:09:58PM -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
From: Andy
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:35:02PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:09:58PM -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
From: Andy
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote:
In this particular case, it's my patch, and I've never sent you a pull
request. I sort of assumed that secur...@kernel.org magically caused
acknowledged fixes to end up in your tree. I'm not sure what I'm
supposed to
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 07:35:57PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:35:02PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Wed, May 28,
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 05:30:19PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:55:20PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:55:20PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 03:35:02PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9,
14 matches
Mail list logo
