On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 20:40 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > mprotect-patch-for-use-by-slim.patch > integrity-service-api-and-dummy-provider.patch > integrity-service-api-and-dummy-provider-cleanup-use-of-configh.patch > integrity-service-api-and-dummy-provider-compilation-warning-fix.patch > slim-main-patch.patch > slim-main-patch-socket_post_create-hook-return-code.patch > slim-main-patch-misc-cleanups-requested-at-inclusion-time.patch > slim-main-patch-handle-failure-to-register.patch > slim-main-patch-fix-bug-with-mm_users-usage.patch > slim-main-patch-security-slim-slm_mainc-make-2-functions-static.patch > slim-secfs-patch.patch > slim-secfs-patch-slim-correct-use-of-snprintf.patch > slim-secfs-patch-cleanup-use-of-configh.patch > slim-make-and-config-stuff.patch > slim-make-and-config-stuff-makefile-fix.patch > slim-debug-output.patch > slim-fix-security-issue-with-the-task_post_setuid-hook.patch > slim-secfs-inode-i_private-build-fix.patch > slim-documentation.patch > fdtable-make-fdarray-and-fdsets-equal-in-size-slim.patch > > Shall hold in -mm.
Why? I haven't seen any evidence that prior review comments have been addressed so far, and a fresh patch set would be beneficial anyway to facilitate full review of the updated code and to allow them to fix their patch descriptions as well (as they were wrong in some instances, describing older versions of the code). -- Stephen Smalley National Security Agency - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
