| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 00:34:29 -0700 From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au> Cc: kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org> Subject: Re: [rfc] Merge kexec-tools into the kernel tree Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au> writes: > Hi, > > After all the excitement of relocating kexec-tools from > one location on kernel.org to another last week it was > suggested to me by Michael Neuling that the merging > kexec-tools into the kernel tree would be a good idea. > > Given that there have been a bunch of issues with kexec > on power that this would resolve. and there is precedence > for tools in the kernel tree, this sounds entirely reasonable to me. > So with my kexec-tools maintainer hat on, I would like to start > a conversation about this. What are the issues with kexec on power? Did someone fail to maintain ABI compatibility? The interface isn't even supposed to be linux specific, so I can't imagine what would motivate moving this into the kernel tree. I'm afraid that someone has a good answer for why their lives would be simpler if /sbin/kexec was in the kernel tree and I will be absolutely horrified and about someones stupidity when I hear that answer. Eric -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists