On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:29:19PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em 05-04-2011 15:16, James Bottomley escreveu: > > On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 08:49 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 04:58:47PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> this series makes it possible to build bit-identical kernel image and > >>> modules from identical sources. Of course the build is already > >>> deterministic in terms of behavior of the code, but the various > >>> timestamps embedded in the object files make it hard to compare two > >>> builds, for instance to verify that a makefile cleanup didn't > >>> accidentally change something. A prime example is /proc/config.gz, which > >>> has both a timestamp in the gzip header and a timestamp in the payload > >>> data. With this series applied, a script like this will produce > >>> identical kernels each time: > >> > >> Very nice stuff. Do you want to take the individual patches through one > >> of your trees, or do you mind if the subsystem maintainers take them > >> through theirs? > > > > I'm happy for this to go through a single tree. > > Me too. > > With respect to the patches I was c/c (patches 13, 14, 31): > > Acked-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@redhat.com>
Me too. Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@suse.de> on the patches I was copied on. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev