linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the net-next tree

4 messages, 3 authors, 2012-01-05 · open the first message on its own page

linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the net-next tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <hidden>
Date: 2012-01-05 04:13:08

Hi Eric,

Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in
net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c between commit 15770b1ab974 ("Bluetooth:
convert force_active variable to flag in l2cap chan") from the net-next
tree and commit 53860f3d0499 ("bluetooth: Properly clone LSM attributes
to newly created child connections") from the selinux tree.

These both remove the same line, but there is probably something more
subtle going on ...  I just used the version from the net-next tree.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the net-next tree

From: Paul Moore <hidden>
Date: 2012-01-05 21:26:07

On Thursday, January 05, 2012 03:12:55 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Eric,

Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in
net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c between commit 15770b1ab974 ("Bluetooth:
convert force_active variable to flag in l2cap chan") from the net-next
tree and commit 53860f3d0499 ("bluetooth: Properly clone LSM attributes
to newly created child connections") from the selinux tree.

These both remove the same line, but there is probably something more
subtle going on ...  I just used the version from the net-next tree.
Something is a bit odd.  When I look in the current linux-next tree I see two 
commits which fix a Bluetooth/LSM bug; the first is correct, the second one 
appears to be some other commit which just hijacked the description from the 
first ... I have no idea what is going on in the second commit; I'll leave 
that to you git gurus :)

 * Correct commit -> 6230c9b4f8957c8938ee4cf2d03166d3c2dc89de

 * Garbage commit -> 53860f3d0499992855d58e33f0f79bfe642dfccb

-- 
paul moore
virtualization @ redhat

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the net-next tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <hidden>
Date: 2012-01-05 22:16:03

Hi Paul,

On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:25:53 -0500 Paul Moore [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thursday, January 05, 2012 03:12:55 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
quoted
Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in
net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c between commit 15770b1ab974 ("Bluetooth:
convert force_active variable to flag in l2cap chan") from the net-next
tree and commit 53860f3d0499 ("bluetooth: Properly clone LSM attributes
to newly created child connections") from the selinux tree.

These both remove the same line, but there is probably something more
subtle going on ...  I just used the version from the net-next tree.
Something is a bit odd.  When I look in the current linux-next tree I see two 
commits which fix a Bluetooth/LSM bug; the first is correct, the second one 
appears to be some other commit which just hijacked the description from the 
first ... I have no idea what is going on in the second commit; I'll leave 
that to you git gurus :)

 * Correct commit -> 6230c9b4f8957c8938ee4cf2d03166d3c2dc89de
That is a commit in Linus' tree before v3.1
 * Garbage commit -> 53860f3d0499992855d58e33f0f79bfe642dfccb
That is the commit in the selinux tree.  This should be unnecessary as
the selinux tree is based on v3.1 (and I basically ignored it in the
merge resolution).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the net-next tree

From: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
Date: 2012-01-05 22:51:58

On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 09:15 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,

On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:25:53 -0500 Paul Moore [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Thursday, January 05, 2012 03:12:55 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
quoted
Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in
net/bluetooth/l2cap_sock.c between commit 15770b1ab974 ("Bluetooth:
convert force_active variable to flag in l2cap chan") from the net-next
tree and commit 53860f3d0499 ("bluetooth: Properly clone LSM attributes
to newly created child connections") from the selinux tree.

These both remove the same line, but there is probably something more
subtle going on ...  I just used the version from the net-next tree.
Something is a bit odd.  When I look in the current linux-next tree I see two 
commits which fix a Bluetooth/LSM bug; the first is correct, the second one 
appears to be some other commit which just hijacked the description from the 
first ... I have no idea what is going on in the second commit; I'll leave 
that to you git gurus :)

 * Correct commit -> 6230c9b4f8957c8938ee4cf2d03166d3c2dc89de
That is a commit in Linus' tree before v3.1
quoted
 * Garbage commit -> 53860f3d0499992855d58e33f0f79bfe642dfccb
That is the commit in the selinux tree.  This should be unnecessary as
the selinux tree is based on v3.1 (and I basically ignored it in the
merge resolution).
Thanks paul...  This must be a result of me rebasing my tree onto 3.1.
No way I should have left this garbage.  It doesn't make sense.  I think
I'll rewrite history for tomorrow since noone is going to notice or
care...

-Eric
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help