linux-kernel - Re: tracking MAINTAINERS versus tracking SUBSYSTEMS

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 19 Aug 2007 22:10:27 +0200
From:	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
To:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
Cc:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: tracking MAINTAINERS versus tracking SUBSYSTEMS

"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com> writes:

> i'm confused -- i thought that was sort of the whole purpose of this
> exercise, to match parts of the kernel source tree against the
> maintainer for those parts, and to do that via the defined
> "subsystem" which is currently used in MAINTAINERS.
>
> you can, of course, banish the concept of a subsystem entirely and
> work purely from a file and directory perspective, but i think the
> notion of the kernel tree being composed of subsystems is a useful
> idea.  that's just my opinion, though.

Obviously the concept of subsystems is the right one, except that
the subsystems aren't that well defined (or they are but not
for average kernel user) - thus "file masks".
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/