linux-kernel - eradicating out of tree modules (was: Linux Security *Module* Framework)

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]

Date:	Sat, 27 Oct 2007 16:07:41 +0200
From:	Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
CC:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>, Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>,
	Thomas Fricaccia <thomas_fricacci@...oo.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Crispin Cowan <crispin@...spincowan.com>,
	Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@...ian.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: eradicating out of tree modules (was: Linux Security *Module* Framework)

Greg KH schrieb:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 11:46:39AM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
>> [...] I still think there will always be
>> a number of external modules that cannot be merged right now or at
>> all, and deliberately making life difficult for out-of-tree code
>> maintainers in order to coerce them into submitting their code for
>> inclusion in the kernel will not work, it'll only create bad
>> feelings.
> 
> Do you have examples of proof of this?

No proof in the legal, mathematical or scientific sense of the
term, but examples:

- at least one talented kernel developer giving up his work,
until then maintained out of tree, after submitting it for
inclusion in the kernel and taking the ensuing fla^Wdiscussion
on LKML (nothing extraordinary, just the usual lack of
courtesy and respect) too much to heart

- the furious flames on LKML each time someone dares posting
helpful information about getting non-GPL software working
again with the newest kernel version, which will certainly
never achieve inclusion of that software in the kernel but
definitely create bad feelings on both sides (righteous
indignation *is* a bad feeling in my book)

>  Read Documentation/stable_api_nonsense.txt for how we already make
> out-of-tree code developer's lives hell :)

Oh yes, that one. A key piece of evidence. Yes, I've read it,
though I sometimes wish I hadn't. Its very title supports my
observation on the creation of bad feelings, and the actual
text doesn't contradict it. (no ":)")

T.

-
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/