linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE][PATCH] Kcli - Kernel command line interface.

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: <a781481a0704231935o5d878692p2311b834f5c6d47e@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Apr 2007 08:05:18 +0530
From:	"Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
To:	"Matt Ranon" <mranon@...adevices.com>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux maillist" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE][PATCH] Kcli - Kernel command line interface.

Hi Matt,

On 4/24/07, Matt Ranon <mranon@...adevices.com> wrote:
> > The obvious question is: what's _wrong_ with doing all this in some
> > cut-down userspace environment like busybox?  Why is this stuff better?
> >
> > Obviously some embedded developers have considered that option and
> > have rejected it.  But we do need to be told, at length, why that
> > decision was made.
>
> There is nothing _wrong_ with doing it all in a cut-down userspace. It
> is a matter of personal preference, culture, and the application. That
> is what makes Linux so great, it is all about choice.
>
> We are developing devices that don't have a user space, and we don't
> see the point in including one just for debug purposes. We will not be
> offended if Kcli is not included into the kernel mainline, nor if Kcli compels
> people to call us stupid (as it already has) just because we are different
> and some people don't understand us. We are firm believers that the
> world, including the Linux kernel world,  would be a nasty place if there
> was only _one_ way to do any given task. Additionally, we  are almost
> certain that there will be others who think like we do, so we are reaching
> out to them. We also feel compelled to give _something_ back to the
> community that has given so much to us, and, for now, this is all we have.

I'm afraid you might've misunderstood the (rather caustic, sometimes)
general nature of comments on lkml :-) But I guess you only have
everything to gain if you use features that have been developed (and
are being *maintained* in the current kernel) that already do the kind
of stuff you want done.

You might have your reasons for being so anxious to avoid any
userspace at all, but quoting famous words, continuing to maintain
Kcli out-of-tree could soon turn out to be an act for
self-flagellation for you :-)
-
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/