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]
Message-ID: <450B2170.5040508@opersys.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Sep 2006 17:56:00 -0400
From:	Karim Yaghmour <karim@...rsys.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...ibm.com>, ltt-dev@...fik.org,
	Michel Dagenais <michel.dagenais@...ymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108


Ingo Molnar wrote:
> with all due respect, do you realize the possibility that this 
> resistance might be a genuine technical opinion on my part that is 
> driven by the quality of the code being offered and by the conceptual 
> problems static tracing introduces in the future, as i see them?

Wait. What I said could not possibly apply to comments you, or anybody
else for that matter, made within this thread. What I said refers to
events and threads which have long since passed. The "resistance" I
allude to is that faced by ltt early on and for as long as several
parties were actively involved in trying to standardize on it. I'm
merely trying to explain the current status of this: several teams
in "apparent" competition one another.

> " and instead use their corporate bodyweight to pressure/seduce kernel
>   developers working for them into pushing their new great [...] "
> 
> could possibly be total, utter nonsense?

Please read this in the above context -- passed events. In as far as
my understanding of events as I was part of them, this was the
best I made of the decision-making thought process at a managerial
level. And I do not wish to substantiate that nor was this meant as
a personal attack against any person or organization. Everyone acted
to the best of their knowledge of the facts at the time and I cannot
fault them for that. I disagreed and was disappointed, obviously,
but that's mine to bear.

Put simply: all parties involved would actually wish things were
different.

Karim

-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ