From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Moore Subject: Re: linux-next: empty commit in the security tree Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 08:11:50 -0400 Message-ID: <2288468.3EeUVpQZvb@sifl> References: <20140321092541.77ae84b831cc71b1318d6f12@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51254 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753128AbaCXML5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Mar 2014 08:11:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140321092541.77ae84b831cc71b1318d6f12@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: James Morris , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday, March 21, 2014 09:25:41 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi James, > > I noticed this commit in the security tree this morning: > > commit 2c5f5c9a1d1b3559cbbda8e014706eb359566c00 > Author: Paul Moore > Date: Wed Mar 19 16:46:04 2014 -0400 > > selinux: fix the output of ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl for SELinux > > It has no changes, just a commit message. Did something go missing? If I remember correctly James merged this patch into his security tree after I had applied it to the SELinux tree but before the SELinux tree was pulled into the security tree. There was also some "differences in process" (see the LSM archives if you're interested) when it came to pulling the SELinux tree into the security tree, the end result is what you are seeing now. The differences should be fixed going forward as James' has agreed to start merging regular releases (e.g. 3.14, 3.15, 3.16, ...) into the security tree so this shouldn't happen again. The good news for this particular patch is that it *is* applied to the security tree, this duplicate/empty entry can be ignored. I'm sorry for the confusion. -Paul -- paul moore security and virtualization @ redhat