| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0804261052550.2813@woody.linux-foundation.org> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 10:56:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: If you want me to quit I will quit On Sat, 26 Apr 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Do you consider all patches that fix build errors as critical? > If yes, only for x86 or for all architectures? I think that things that hold up people testing a development kernel is "important". Maybe not "critical", but certainly stuff I should fix asap, just so that people who might otherwise test a kernel (but aren't technical enough to fix even possibly trivial errors) won't get discouraged. And yes, x86(-64) is the one that matters a whole lot more for that kind of 'random tester' issue. If other architectures don't build in some random config, I don't consider that a huge deal, since anybody who builds a development kernel for (say) powerpc will also generally have the ability to fix whatever silly brown-paper-bug issue just as well as I could. Linus -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists