linux-kernel - Re: Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1

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: <20060924101753.GB4813@ucw.cz>
Date:	Sun, 24 Sep 2006 10:17:53 +0000
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
Cc:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.16.30-pre1

Hi!

> > Adrian, when you have a doubt whether such a fix should go into next
> > release, simply tell people about the problem and ask them to test
> > current driver. If nobody encounters the problem, you can safely keep
> > the patch in your fridge until someone complains. By that time, the
> > risks associated with this patch will be better known.
> 
> It's not that I wanted to upgrade ACPI to the latest version.
> 
> And my rules are:
> - patch must be in Linus' tree
> - I'm asking the patch authors and maintainers of the affected subsystem
>   whether the patch is OK for 2.6.16

I thought stable rules were longer than this... including 'patch must
be < 100 lines' and 'must be bugfix for serious bug'. Changing rules
for -stable series in the middle of it seems like a bad idea...

Maybe you can keep -ab with relaxed rules and -stable with original
rules?

							Pavel
-- 
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.
-
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/