From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [Ecryptfs-devel] [PATCH] ecryptfs: some inode attrs, and a question Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:51:43 -0800 Message-ID: <20090115155143.e4509e7e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <7471.1231827621@jrobl> <20090115150332.f72ad0f8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <496FC91C.10806@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: hooanon05@yahoo.co.jp, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, ecryptfs-devel@lists.launchpad.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mhalcrow@us.ibm.com To: Tyler Hicks Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:43210 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755486AbZAOXwP (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:52:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <496FC91C.10806@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:39:08 -0600 Tyler Hicks wrote: > > I am puzzled by the current ecryptfs maintenance situation. > > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/768122 > > The torch has been passed to me. :) yup, thanks. > > I queued this for 2.6.30. It could be bumped up for 2.6.29 (and even > > backported to 2.6.28 and earlier) with suitable acks from the > > maintainer(?) > > > > The changes to ecryptfs_rmdir() are valid, but not the rest of the patch. > OK, I'll drop my copy. Please send something back at me sometime, with indications about which kernel version(s) it should be merged into. We should chase J.R. for a Signed-off-by:, which was omitted from the original patch.