linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

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: <alpine.DEB.0.9999.0711132055550.7865@sheep.housecafe.de>
Date:	Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:00:30 +0100 (CET)
From:	Christian Kujau <lists@...dbynature.de>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> I think that we're fairly good about working the regressions in
> Adrian/Michal/Rafael's lists but once Linus releases 2.6.x we tend to let
> the unsolved ones slide, and we don't pay as much attention to the
> regressions which 2.6.x testers report.

Can't we wait until all regressions[0] are fixed before releasing a new 
2.6.x? I'd consider regressions a *literal* show stopper, and with this 
policy they just have be fixed, nothing would "slide"...

my 2 cents,
Christian.

[0] preferably only reproducible regressions, with responsive reporters.
-- 
BOFH excuse #380:

Operators killed when huge stack of backup tapes fell over.
-
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/