linux-kernel - Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070627162650.GP1094@stusta.de>
Date:	Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:26:50 +0200
From:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
To:	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
Cc:	Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Please release a stable kernel Linux 3.0

On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 12:08:12PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> On 06/27/2007 11:52 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 04:53:58PM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
> >> Al Viro wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 11:18:36AM +0200, Zolt?n HUBERT wrote:
> >>>> And as I understand it, this is (was ?) the whole point of
> >>>> stable/development kernels. "We" can trust a newer stable
> >>>> kernel to be a drop-in replacement for an older stable
> >>>> kernel (from the same series), while development kernels
> >>>> need time to stabilise with the new whizz-bang-pfouit stuff
> >>>> that you all so nicely add.
> >>> "Drop-in" in which sense?  That out-of-tree modules keep working?
> >>> Not really...
> >> Al, be reasonable.  There are many out-of-tree GPL modules that won't be 
> >> accepted into mainline, never mind those that shouldn't be accepted.  But 
> >> these modules do have a right to not be obsoleted by constant API changes.
> > 
> > "have a right" are strong words.
> > Who is granting them this right?
> > 
> >> You are effectively inhibiting the development of an out-of-tree GPL module 
> >> pool, by constantly pulling the rug under that community.
> >>
> >> Do you think this is fair?
> > 
> > Why are these modules not submitted for inclusion into the kernel?
> > 
> 
> I was trying to figure that out for this one:
> 
> http://code.ximeta.com/trac-ndas
> 
> No mention of ever trying to get this upstream AFAICT... but this is
> interesting:
> 
>   The linux market is limited comparing that of MS Windows.
>   it is very hard for us to support the various linux distros.
>   we, Ximeta, are trying to support those requests as many as
>   we can, though the resources are very limited.

One of their module contains a 180 kB binary blob and
MODULE_LICENSE("Proprietary, Send bug reports to support@...eta.com").

And it calls tons of functions EXPORT_SYMBOL'ed by their other
3 modules that are MODULE_LICENSE("Dual BSD/GPL")...

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
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/