Labeled Networking tree for linux-next

Labeled Networking tree for linux-next

[Paul Moore]

Hello,

I've created a new labeled networking tree to feed bits into linux-next 
which should replace the lblnet-2.6_testing tree which is currently 
used.  The new tree (currently empty) can be found here:

 * git://git.infradead.org/users/pcmoore/lblnet-2.6_next

Thanks.

-- 
paul moore
linux @ hp

Re: Labeled Networking tree for linux-next

[James Morris]

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008, Paul Moore wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I've created a new labeled networking tree to feed bits into linux-next 
> which should replace the lblnet-2.6_testing tree which is currently 
> used.  The new tree (currently empty) can be found here:
> 
>  * git://git.infradead.org/users/pcmoore/lblnet-2.6_next

Is this stuff likely to affect more of net/ or security/ ?   I think it 
should go in via either the networking or security-testing trees.

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>

Re: Labeled Networking tree for linux-next

[Paul Moore]

On Wednesday 23 July 2008 2:16:27 pm James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008, Paul Moore wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I've created a new labeled networking tree to feed bits into
> > linux-next which should replace the lblnet-2.6_testing tree which
> > is currently used.  The new tree (currently empty) can be found
> > here:
> >
> >  * git://git.infradead.org/users/pcmoore/lblnet-2.6_next
>
> Is this stuff likely to affect more of net/ or security/ ?   I think
> it should go in via either the networking or security-testing trees.

Yes, the labeled networking stuff usually affects both net/ and 
security/.  I really don't care how it gets into linux-next as long as 
it gets in at some point.  I sent the mail because the 
lblnet-2.6_testing tree (currently empty, but not for much longer) is 
currently being pulled into linux-next (I think it started in the 
initial push to move -mm into linux-next).

If we don't decide to drop the labeled networking git tree from 
linux-next can we at least shift from using the lblnet-2.6_testing to 
the lblnet-2.6_next tree?

-- 
paul moore
linux @ hp

Re: Labeled Networking tree for linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1250 bytes --]

Hi Paul,

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:19:39 -0400 Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, the labeled networking stuff usually affects both net/ and 
> security/.  I really don't care how it gets into linux-next as long as 
> it gets in at some point.  I sent the mail because the 
> lblnet-2.6_testing tree (currently empty, but not for much longer) is 
> currently being pulled into linux-next (I think it started in the 
> initial push to move -mm into linux-next).
> 
> If we don't decide to drop the labeled networking git tree from 
> linux-next can we at least shift from using the lblnet-2.6_testing to 
> the lblnet-2.6_next tree?

I have made the change.

I have no problem with trees coming into linux-next from more than one
source (see e.g. the wireless tree which is merged into the net tree).
In fact it can be useful so that you will discover conflicting changes in
the security and net trees before you have your tree merged into theirs.
I have moved your tree after both the net and security-testing trees
(that way if it gets merged into either of them its merge into linux-next
becomes a noop).

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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: Labeled Networking tree for linux-next

[David Miller]

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:06:24 +1000

> I have no problem with trees coming into linux-next from more than one
> source (see e.g. the wireless tree which is merged into the net tree).
> In fact it can be useful so that you will discover conflicting changes in
> the security and net trees before you have your tree merged into theirs.

Yes, indeed, this would work from my side as well.  The wireless
model has worked well so far.

Re: Labeled Networking tree for linux-next

[Paul Moore]

On Wednesday 23 July 2008 8:06:24 pm Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:19:39 -0400 Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp.com> 
wrote:
> > Yes, the labeled networking stuff usually affects both net/ and
> > security/.  I really don't care how it gets into linux-next as long
> > as it gets in at some point.  I sent the mail because the
> > lblnet-2.6_testing tree (currently empty, but not for much longer)
> > is currently being pulled into linux-next (I think it started in
> > the initial push to move -mm into linux-next).
> >
> > If we don't decide to drop the labeled networking git tree from
> > linux-next can we at least shift from using the lblnet-2.6_testing
> > to the lblnet-2.6_next tree?
>
> I have made the change.
>
> I have no problem with trees coming into linux-next from more than
> one source (see e.g. the wireless tree which is merged into the net
> tree). In fact it can be useful so that you will discover conflicting
> changes in the security and net trees before you have your tree
> merged into theirs. I have moved your tree after both the net and
> security-testing trees (that way if it gets merged into either of
> them its merge into linux-next becomes a noop).

That sounds like a reasonable argument, thanks for making the change.

-- 
paul moore
linux @ hp