From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phillip Lougher Subject: Re: Pull request for Squashfs Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 13:03:25 +0000 Message-ID: <4962051D.3050205@lougher.demon.co.uk> References: <20081028192919.94def38b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4961FD0C.8040309@lougher.demon.co.uk> <20090105235241.3a2d54fc.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from anchor-post-2.mail.demon.net ([195.173.77.133]:53407 "EHLO anchor-post-2.mail.demon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751140AbZAENDM (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:03:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20090105235241.3a2d54fc.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-next@vger.kernel.org Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Phillip, Andrew, > > On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 12:29:00 +0000 Phillip Lougher wrote: >> Andrew Morton wrote: >> >>> Generally looks OK to me. Please prepare a tree for linux-next >>> inclusion and unless serious problems are pointed out I'd suggest >>> shooting for a 2.6.29 merge. >> Can you try pulling the master branch of: >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pkl/squashfs-next.git >> >> into linux-next please? >> >> The Squashfs patches have been tested. > > Is this intended for 2.6.29 (even this late) or should I wait until after > -rc1 to add this to linux-next? > Hmm, I didn't realise it was late for 2.6.29 :-( I'd prefer it to be for 2.6.29 if possible. But the decision isn't probably up to me... Thanks Phillip