Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 10:29:35 +0100
From: Mickaël Salaün <>
To: James Morris <>
Cc: Kees Cook <>, Jann Horn <>,
 "Serge E . Hallyn" <>, Al Viro <>,
 Andrew Morton <>,
 Andy Lutomirski <>,
 Anton Ivanov <>, Arnd Bergmann
 <>, Casey Schaufler <>,
 David Howells <>, Jeff Dike <>,
 Jonathan Corbet <>, Michael Kerrisk <>,
 Richard Weinberger <>, Shuah Khan <>,
 Vincent Dagonneau <>,,,,,,,,,, Mickaël Salaün
Subject: Re: [PATCH v30 02/12] landlock: Add ruleset and domain management

On 24/03/2021 21:31, James Morris wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>>>> Cc: Kees Cook <>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <>
>>>> Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <>
>>>> Link:
>>> (Aside: you appear to be self-adding your Link: tags -- AIUI, this is
>>> normally done by whoever pulls your series. I've only seen Link: tags
>>> added when needing to refer to something else not included in the
>>> series.)
>> It is an insurance to not lose history. :)
> How will history be lost? The code is in the repo and discussions can 
> easily be found by searching for subjects or message IDs.

The (full and ordered) history may be hard to find without any
Message-ID in commit messages. The Lore links keep that information (in
the commit message) and redirect to the related archived email thread,
which is very handy. For instance, Linus can rely on those links to
judge the quality of a patch:

> Is anyone else doing this self linking?

I don't know, but it doesn't hurt. This way, if you're using git am
without b4 am -l (or forgot to add links manually), the history is still
pointed out by these self-reference links. I find it convenient and it
is a safeguard to not forget them, no matter who takes the patches.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.