Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit tree

From: Al Viro <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 06:31:38 +0000

On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 07:33:03PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Eric Paris <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> > I think David is right, all the conflicts should come from
> > security-testing.  Al does have other good stuff in his tree though, Al
> > do you want to just kick all of my patches out?
> 
> Maybe it's worth James taking Al's changes into his tree and resolving all the
> conflicts in favour of what's in his tree.

It's already done.  Everything that used to be in for-linus except
tty_audit.c one went into mainline; tty_audit got rediffed and sent
to James; for-linus..for-next had several Eric's patches that were
in security tree (and thus are dropped from audit one - I couldn't
care less which tree are they merged from as long as they get into
the mainline) and an s390 patch that got sent off to linux-s390@vger
and would be better off going via the s390 tree anyway.

So at this point everything in that branch is taken care of.  I do have
several more in a private queue, but those will need review and testing
before they go into -next.