Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756043AbYFHOue (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2008 10:50:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753964AbYFHOuZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2008 10:50:25 -0400 Received: from styx.suse.cz ([82.119.242.94]:60863 "EHLO mail.suse.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753929AbYFHOuY (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2008 10:50:24 -0400 Subject: Re: Missing patch from stable [3/7] From: Miklos Szeredi To: Willy Tarreau Cc: stable@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michael Halcrow , Christoph Hellwig In-Reply-To: <20080608122920.GA10491@1wt.eu> References: <20080608085923.GC6439@1wt.eu> <1212923462.4020.224.camel@tucsk> <20080608122920.GA10491@1wt.eu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2008 16:50:22 +0200 Message-Id: <1212936622.4020.236.camel@tucsk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 782 Lines: 20 On Sun, 2008-06-08 at 14:29 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Well, you know the implications of leaving these known bugs open more than > me. If you think some of them are really not needed, I'm fine with this, > but some definitely fix real bugs (judging by the code and the comments). Yeah. Perhaps there should also be a rule, that -stable patches for EXPERIMENTAL stuff (like ecryptfs) are automatically rejected. And then they wouldn't increase the workload for the people collecting/reviewing the stable series. Thanks, Miklos -- 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/