linux-kernel - Re: so what *is* obsolete and removable?

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: <4623FB0E.4080602@imap.cc>
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2007 00:39:10 +0200
From:	Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>
To:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
CC:	i4ldeveloper@...tserv.isdn4linux.de, Karsten Keil <kkeil@...e.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: so what *is* obsolete and removable?

Am 15.04.2007 22:55 schrieb Robert P. J. Day:
>   as i recall, the isdn4linux was *un*obsoleted, wasn't it?

Actually, it wasn't.

We *did* reach a consensus that isdn4linux is not obsolete in the
accepted sense of the word, because there is no replacement for it
so far.

OTOH I have since submitted (twice, in fact) a patch that would remove
the "(obsolete)" label from the Kconfig entry, but somehow nothing
ever became of it. My submissions just linger in LKML, uncommented and
unmerged.

To sum it up, we agree that the "(obsolete)" label is wrong, but we
won't remove it. I have no idea how to resolve that situation.

What I do know is that it would be very wrong to remove isdn4linux,
because it has an existing userbase with nowhere else to go.

-- 
Tilman Schmidt                                  E-Mail: tilman@...p.cc
Wehrhausweg 66                                  Fax: +49 228 4299019
53227 Bonn
Germany

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (254 bytes)