linux-kernel - Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} _

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:	Thu, 01 May 2008 15:51:51 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, bunk@...nel.org,
	venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com, trini@...nel.crashing.org,
	mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com
Subject: Re: huge gcc 4.1.{0,1} __weak problem

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 15:27:26 -0700 (PDT)

> So yes, we can distinguish 4.1.2 (good, and very common) from 4.1.{0,1} 
> (bad, and rather uncommon).
> 
> And yes, considering that 4.1.1 (and even more so 4.1.0) should be rare to 
> begin with, I think it's better to just not support it.

This is my impression as well.
--
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/