linux-kernel - Re: If you want me to quit I will quit

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:	Sat, 26 Apr 2008 10:56:54 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
cc:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
	Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: If you want me to quit I will quit

On Sat, 26 Apr 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> 
> Do you consider all patches that fix build errors as critical?
> If yes, only for x86 or for all architectures?

I think that things that hold up people testing a development kernel is 
"important". Maybe not "critical", but certainly stuff I should fix asap, 
just so that people who might otherwise test a kernel (but aren't 
technical enough to fix even possibly trivial errors) won't get 
discouraged.

And yes, x86(-64) is the one that matters a whole lot more for that kind 
of 'random tester' issue. If other architectures don't build in some 
random config, I don't consider that a huge deal, since anybody who builds 
a development kernel for (say) powerpc will also generally have the 
ability to fix whatever silly brown-paper-bug issue just as well as I 
could.

			Linus
--
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/