linux-kernel - Re: Reiser4 Inclusion

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:	Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:09:39 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
	Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@....de>,
	Grzegorz Kulewski <kangur@...com.net>,
	Diego Calleja <diegocg@...il.com>, arjan@...radead.org,
	caleb@...ebgray.com
Subject: Re: Reiser4 Inclusion

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 21:12:21 +0200, Tilman Schmidt said:
> On 19.07.2006 21:04, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
> > Which part of "read Documentation/SubmittingPatches.txt and do what it says,
> > or it doesn't get into the kernel" do you have trouble understanding?
> 
> None. Why do you think I'd have? And what relevance does this have to
> the present discussion?

So in other words, you're trying to tell us about what code should or
shouldn't allow into the kernel when you don't have even a clue what's
required on a purely technical level, or how the code gets into the kernel.

> > It isn't a case of "out of tree code or you haven't". There's actually
> > *three* major categories:

> Correct. And you could easily subdivide it further. Your point being?

You're the one who was trying to paint it as a binary "either you have out of
tree code or you don't", even though the actual situation is much more
complicated.  You want to subdivide it even further, go right ahead. But the
more you subdivide, the less binary it is....

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped