linux-kernel - Re: "obsolete" versus "deprecated", and a new config option?

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701171749430.4760@CPE00045a9c397f-CM001225dbafb6>
Date:	Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:51:55 -0500 (EST)
From:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
To:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
cc:	Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: "obsolete" versus "deprecated", and a new config option?

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:04:20 EST, "Robert P. J. Day" said:
>
> > > How much of the 'OBSOLETE' code should just be labelled 'BROKEN'
> > > instead?
> >
> > the stuff that's actually "broken."  :-)
>
> Right - the question is how much code qualifies as either/both, and
> which we should use when we encounter the random driver that's both
> obsolete *and* broken...

that's entirely a judgment call on the part of the code's maintainer.
if something is both obsolete and broken, then make it depend on
*both* OBSOLETE and BROKEN if you want.  no big deal.

rday
-
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/