linux-kernel - Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re: nmi

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: <1188227585.2435.192.camel@dhcp193.mvista.com>
Date:	Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:13:05 -0700
From:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To:	Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>,
	eranian@....hp.com, ak@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Who wants to maintain KR list for stable releases? (was Re:
	nmi_watchdog=2 regression in 2.6.21)

On Mon, 2007-08-27 at 13:38 +0200, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> On 27/08/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 02:45:02 +0200 Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Daniel Walker pisze:
> > > [snip]
> > > > Have you considered maintaining all the lists in Bugzilla?
> > >
> > > Yes, I have considered it.
> > >
> > > Bugzilla sucks when it comes to tracking things. There is
> > > a regression field, but there are no difference between
> > > 2.6.22 and 2.6.23 regression.
> > >
> > > Most people are reporting bugs through LKML:
> > > - 23 regressions with reference to LKML
> > > - 4 regressions with reference to Bugzilla
> >
> > Presumably that's fixable.
> >
> > But I think bugzilla is more appropriate for tracking longer-term bugs.  If
> > some problem has just popped up (or has just been discovered) then it's
> > best to try to knock it over with a quick email discussion.  If that
> > doesn't work out then the bug should be captured in bugzilla so that it
> > doesn't get lost.
> >
> > The really important data which bugzilla will record are
> >
> > a) the fact that the bug exists and
> >
> > b) the identity of the person who can reproduce it and who will hopefully
> > work with us on fixing it.
> >
> > > > If you had a
> > > > search of open bugs they would just fall of the list as they get
> > > > closed..
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, the world is not perfect.
> > >
> > > Is anyone interested in maintaining KR list for stable releases?
> >
> > I'm not sure that we need one, really.  Any bugs in a stable release can be
> > handled via email and/or bugzilla as we are presently doing?
> >
> > What I'm concerned about is that regressions which we didn't fix are just
> > getting lost.  Is anyone taking care to ensure that they are getting
> > transitioned into bugzilla for tracking?
> 
> I can copy all regression reports into Bugzilla after each release.

Should we get the regression field fix before? Or had you planned on
just bypassing that completely ?

Daniel

-
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/