linux-kernel - Re: RFC - 2.6.19-rc5-mm1 Documentation/Changes cleanup

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200611121818.kACIIlGZ032051@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:	Sun, 12 Nov 2006 13:18:46 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC - 2.6.19-rc5-mm1 Documentation/Changes cleanup

On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 19:06:40 +0100, Adrian Bunk said:

> >  o  util-linux             2.10o                   # fdformat --version
> > +o  mount                  ???                     # mount --version
> 
> mount is part of util-linux.

Yeah, I know, but ver_linux reports both for some reason.

> >  o  pcmciautils            004                     # pccardctl -V
> > +o  pcmcia-cs              ???                     # cardmgr -V
> 
> This was just removed - pcmcia-cs support was scheduled to be removed 
> in November 2005 (sic), and I hope it won't take too long until it will 
> finally be removed.

And I *just* submitted a patch to actually report pcmciautils version. :)
If ver_linux was only reporting pcmcia-cs version, it probably should be
mentioned here.  Once we actually nuke it, we can certainly remove this
line and the related check in ver_linux.

> > +o  Linuc C Library        ???                     # ldd /bin/sh
> > +o  Dynamic linker (ldd)   ???                     # ldd -v or ldd --version
> > +o  Linux C++ Library      ???                     # ls -l /usr/lib/libstd++.so
> >...
> 
> I don't think these make much sense.

I was particularly mystified by the C++ reference in ver_linux.  But apparently
somebody felt it was important enough to report, and I was basically just trying
to get the two things in sync.  Probably a good place for a 'N/A' or such.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped