linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/24] MacBook Air patch sequence (v2)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Fri, 30 Sep 2011 11:10:34 -0700
From:	Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/24] MacBook Air patch sequence (v2)

On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 06:57:05 -0700, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:

> No, actually this makes it easier for -stable as each individual patch
> fixes a problem, so in re-reading them, I have no objection for them to
> go into -stable.

Ok, cool. Splitting these up was a pain.

> Would these also work on 3.0?

They won't apply cleanly, but yes, they should be useful there.

> > I'd rather have a 'regular' PC; getting Debian installed on this machine
> > was no picnic.
> 
> Due to UEFI stuff?  Or something else?

UEFI, the lack of CD booting, and the general 'Steve knows best'
attitude of the hardware.

> I agree, it is a very nice hardware form factor that no other
> manufacturer can seem to duplicate for the same (well, any) price these
> days.

Yeah, PC vendors clearly aren't making hardware for us anymore.

-- 
keith.packard@...el.com

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped