linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] OMFS filesystem version 3

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: <1208169415.31695.51.camel@pmac.infradead.org>
Date:	Mon, 14 Apr 2008 11:36:55 +0100
From:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@...e.fr>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, me@...copeland.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] OMFS filesystem version 3

On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 03:22 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Not so.  There is a habit of treating corporate developers as somehow
> inferior to the purer old-timers.  I know - people have told me.  Quite
> often. 

I'm not sure I agree. There is a habit of treating people who post crap
code as somehow inferior to the purer old-timers, certainly. And that's
probably not such a good thing, but at least it helps to keep the
signal:noise ratio down a little, overall.

But except to the extent that there is a correlation between 'corporate
developers' and 'people who post crap code', I wouldn't agree with your
statement above. 

We have a lot of people working for large corporations who don't post
crap code, and to whom Christoph almost never promotes an attitude of
violence. Looking at Jon's 'who wrote 2.6.23' analysis, I see quite a
lot of successful 'corporate' involvement.

> And for various reasons, those people feel limited in their options
> for standing up for themselves.

Anyone trying to defend crap code _should_ be limited in their options,
surely? And sometimes, 'corporate developers' do try to defend crap
code, because they've made traditional corporate mistakes like
developing it all in private and presenting it as a fait accomplis
without proper a priori review, and/or haven't budgeted for the
necessary time to fix it.

-- 
dwmw2

--
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/