[Patch 0/5] [Karmic] SRU: AppArmor fixes

[John Johansen]

Stefan Bader wrote:
> Tim Gardner wrote:
>> John Johansen wrote:
>>> The following changes since commit 18fec74a0b2d08ddfe424cf9376a4f09fff9d2ee:
>>>   Leann Ogasawara (1):
>>>         UBUNTU: [Config] Move position of CONFIG_LIRC_ENE0100 for ports configs
>>>
>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>
>>>   git://kernel.ubuntu.com/jj/apparmor-karmic.git master
>>>
>>> John Johansen (5):
>>>       UBUNTU: SAUCE: AppArmor: Fix oops after profile removal
>>>       UBUNTU: SAUCE: AppArmor: Fix Oops when in apparmor_bprm_set_creds
>>>       UBUNTU: SAUCE: AppArmor: Fix cap audit_caching preemption disabling
>>>       UBUNTU: SAUCE: AppArmor: Fix refcounting bug causing leak of creds
>>>       UBUNTU: SAUCE: AppArmor: Fix oops there is no tracer and doing unsafe transition.
>>>
>>>  ubuntu/apparmor/capability.c |    1 +
>>>  ubuntu/apparmor/domain.c     |    9 +++++++--
>>>  ubuntu/apparmor/policy.c     |    2 +-
>>>  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>>
>> I believe what Stefan was referring to when he mentioned requiring a
>> more thorough SRU explanation for these patches was the SRU
>> justification in the LP bug. The SRU review team do not necessarily look
>> at the commit message, so placing the SRU justification therein is
>> superfluous.
>>
>> See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates for more details.
>>
>> rtg
> 
> Sort of my fault. I was not specific enough. I asked for it in the mail but
> sort of was meaning the 0/x introduction part (so a quick reviewer here on
> the list does not need to check the bug reports).
> The commit message itself should not contain it. In this case it might just
> be an addition to it in the mails sent. Any way I would sort it out before
> applying and this is more for future reference.
> 
eh, no my fault for being to dense to stick in the right mail, or come back and ask about it.  I can resend with things in the correct place if you want.

john