On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 03:58:15PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 09:01 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > (Apologies to those that got duplicates of this.  I forgot to CC the
> > stable list on my first sending of this.  Mea culpa.)
> > 
> > I went through the current Fedora F17 kernel and found quite a few
> > patches we are carrying for bugs that should probably go to stable.
> > Some of them have the stable tag in the upstream commit but don't seem
> > to be queued up in the stable-queue tree on kernel.org.  Maybe you
> > already have those stashed somewhere.
> [...]
> 
> You can see Greg's stable queue(s) from
> <git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git>.

Right.  Which is why I said "... queued up in the stable-queue tree on
kernel.org".

> Many commits cc'd to stable don't cleanly apply.  Unless it's easy to
> resolve the conflict, Greg will usually send out a 'FAILED' message to
> the addresses mentioned in the patch when this happens, and someone then
> needs to provide a backported version that does apply.

Yep, aware of that too.  The commits I highlighted hadn't had any of
those emails, either FAILED or applied.  It seems Greg (or his scripts)
has gone through a large portion of the tree again today and a number
of them were picked up, so that's good.

Anyway, the intention of the email was two-fold.  1) To highlight what
Fedora is carrying in addition to the normal stable tree and why via
bug numbers.  You know, being good community members.  2) A gentle prod
on perhaps including them in 3.4.5 so we (selfishly) can stop carrying
them around as patches.  That also goes back to point 1 though since it
benefits others.

Thanks for the reply.

josh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to