On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Scott Lovenberg <scott.lovenberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 6/3/2011 12:37 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: >> >> On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 21:36:01 +0530 >> Suresh Jayaraman<sjayaraman@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On 06/03/2011 06:41 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 12:06:19 +0530 >>>> Suresh Jayaraman<sjayaraman@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>>> When ntlm security mechanim is used, the message that warns about the >>>>> upgrade >>>>> to ntlmv2 got the kernel release version wrong (Blame it on Linus :). >>>>> Fix it. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Suresh Jayaraman<sjayaraman@xxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> fs/cifs/connect.c | 2 +- >>>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/fs/cifs/connect.c b/fs/cifs/connect.c >>>>> index 6d88b82..84c7307 100644 >>>>> --- a/fs/cifs/connect.c >>>>> +++ b/fs/cifs/connect.c >>>>> @@ -1976,7 +1976,7 @@ cifs_get_smb_ses(struct TCP_Server_Info *server, >>>>> struct smb_vol *volume_info) >>>>> warned_on_ntlm = true; >>>>> cERROR(1, "default security mechanism requested. The >>>>> default " >>>>> "security mechanism will be upgraded from ntlm >>>>> to " >>>>> - "ntlmv2 in kernel release 2.6.41"); >>>>> + "ntlmv2 in kernel release 3.1"); >>>>> } >>>>> ses->overrideSecFlg = volume_info->secFlg; >>>>> >>>> Looks good. Though I'm not sure whether we should call it 3.1.0? >>>> Regardless... >>> >>> I thought about this. But, as Linus has already said: >>> >>> "Now, my alpha-maleness sadly does not actually extend to all the >>> scripts and Makefile rules, so the kernel is fighting back, and is >>> calling itself 3.0.0-rc1. We'll have the usual 6-7 weeks to wrestle it >>> into submission, and get scripts etc cleaned up, and the final release >>> should be just "3.0". The -stable team can use the third number for >>> their versioning." >>> >>> I think 3.1 should be ok? >>> >> Pity -- would have been sort of nice to always use a 3 field version >> number since the stable kernels will need that, but...not my call. >> Either way, patch is fine. > > I think 3.0 was being called 3.0.0 officially because some scripts broke > without a "major.minor.revision" scheme. At least for the moment, according > to Linus' commit message. > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=55922c9d1b84b89cb946c777fddccb3247e7df2c It won't matter for an informational message fortunately and 3.1 > 3.0.1 -- Thanks, Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
