linux-kernel - Re: Unable to continue testing of 2.6.25

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: <47B96E94.7000109@imap.cc>
Date:	Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:40:04 +0100
From:	Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	bunk@...nel.org, elendil@...net.nl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Unable to continue testing of 2.6.25

David Miller schrieb:
> From: Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>
> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:24:56 +0100
> 
>> No, that's not the real problem. Even if the kernel didn't lack
>> any required functionality and it could all be done today without
>> VirtualBox, pulling the rug from underneath it like that leaves
>> all those who are currently relying on it without the ability to
>> continue testing newer kernels until they find the time to redesign
>> their working environment.
> 
> No, it is VirtualBox's problem.

Why's that beeping noise coming from my SEP field detector? :-)

>  Nobody outside of the kernel
> should be using that symbol, it can only be used for totally
> unsupportable things as far as upstream is concerned.

Then why was it exported in the first place?

Still, we are talking about two completely different types of
problem here: (a) the technical problem of why something stopped
working and how it should be fixed and (b) the practical problem
of users left standing in the rain while such fixing is taking
place. While (a) might look like the only real problem to kernel
developers, (b) often feels much more real to users.
Unfortunately, discussing alternative solutions to (a) does
little to solve (b).

The conventional way of addressing (b) is to avoid it altogether
by giving sufficient advance warning before removing a feature,
and sticking to the feature removal schedule. If (as apparently
in this case) that isn't possible, then other ways to mitigate
the problem need to be found. That may require switching off
some SEP field generators, though. :-)

HTH
T.

-- 
Tilman Schmidt                    E-Mail: tilman@...p.cc
Bonn, Germany
Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits.
Ungeöffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe Rückseite)

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (251 bytes)