linux-kernel - Re: Linux 2.6.21

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: <1182.81.207.0.53.1177891524.squirrel@secure.samage.net>
Date:	Mon, 30 Apr 2007 02:05:24 +0200 (CEST)
From:	"Indan Zupancic" <indan@....nu>
To:	"Johannes Stezenbach" <js@...uxtv.org>
Cc:	"Adrian Bunk" <bunk@...sta.de>,
	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Diego Calleja" <diegocg@...il.com>,
	"Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"Chuck Ebbert" <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.21

On Mon, April 30, 2007 01:41, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> Developers are just humans and if they have no incentive to
> act on a bug report they will ignore it. I think this is a
> fact that you have to deal with.

Reporters are just humans too and if they have no incentive to
post bugs they won't. So it's a lose/lose situation, really.
With a group of people working together they should try to
motivate each other, not demoralize everyone.

(I know, each bug report is a pain, voicing someone's failure.
So ignoring it might make people feel better, but it doesn't
fix anything.)

> It's also not necessarily the fault of the reporter if
> a bug report gets ignored, but for every report a developer
> has to make a decision to handle it or not, and there are
> lots of reasons why he may decide to not handle it, or
> at least not now (and then forget about it).

True. There's also a difference between a bad bug report and
one that a specific developer won't handle. In the former case
anyone could recognize it and tell the reporter about it. The
latter is a bit trickier, but if the developer thinks about
looking at it later, he better can tell the reporter just that.
A short "I'll take a look at it, later, when I've more time."
is so much better than plain silence.

> But I'm quite sure that an important bug would be reported
> again until fixed.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. What's worse, why would the
reporter bother telling that the bug is fixed in version N+1?
No one cared about it anyway, so there's no one to tell it to.
That would explain a lot open bugs too.

Greetings,

Indan

-
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/