Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S263969AbTCWWqt>; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 17:46:49 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S263970AbTCWWqs>; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 17:46:48 -0500
Received: from franka.aracnet.com ([216.99.193.44]:38617 "EHLO
	franka.aracnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S263969AbTCWWqr>; Sun, 23 Mar 2003 17:46:47 -0500
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 14:57:41 -0800
From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: James Bourne <jbourne@mtroyal.ab.ca>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>,
       Martin Mares <mj@ucw.cz>, Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>,
       Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>, szepe@pinerecords.com,
       arjanv@redhat.com, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Subject: Re: Ptrace hole / Linux 2.2.25
Message-ID: <1470000.1048460259@[10.10.2.4]>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.51.0303231522150.17155@skuld.mtroyal.ab.ca>
References: <20030323193457.GA14750@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
 <200303231938.h2NJcAq14927@devserv.devel.redhat.com>
 <20030323194423.GC14750@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
 <1048448838.1486.12.camel@phantasy.awol.org>
 <20030323195606.GA15904@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
 <1048450211.1486.19.camel@phantasy.awol.org>
 <402760000.1048451441@[10.10.2.4]>
 <20030323203628.GA16025@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
 <Pine.LNX.4.51.0303231410250.17155@skuld.mtroyal.ab.ca>
 <920000.1048456387@[10.10.2.4]><3E7E335C.2050509@pobox.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.51.0303231522150.17155@skuld.mtroyal.ab.ca>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Linux/x86)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 723
Lines: 18

>> akpm has suggested something like this in the past.  I respectfully 
>> disagree.
> 
> I also disagree.  Although it would be nice, it's not practical.  What
> people want is strictly fixes and security related patches, and that
> is ALL I propose to want to include.  Perhaps if the vendors
> want a "common vendor" patch they could maintain it? ;)

I still think the common vendor kernel is valuable, but different ;-)
A straight fixes tree is valuable too ... thanks.

M.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/