linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.26-rc9: Reported regressions from 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]

Date:	Mon, 07 Jul 2008 09:11:11 +1000
From:	Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@...a.org.au>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@...il.com>,
	Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
	Maximilian Engelhardt <maxi@...monizer.de>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
	Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@...il.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.26-rc9: Reported regressions from 2.6.25

Hi Rafael etc.

On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 00:57 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, 7 of July 2008, Rene Herman wrote:
> > On 06-07-08 23:56, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > 
> > > BTW, the automated emails I'm sending are to let the reporters know
> > > that I'm interested in the current status of the bug.  They are free
> > > not to reply to them, but in that case I assume they don't really
> > > care whether or not I'm tracking the bugs they reported.
> > 
> > I did/do wonder by the way when I get them if I should be replying if 
> > the status is unchanged from my viewpoint...
> > 
> > I believe your automated emails say something like "please verify if 
> > this problem is still relevant" but don't spell out what do after you
> > verified that it is. It's sort of natural to take that as "I need to 
> > reply telling people it's fixed if it is but can remain silent if 
> > nothing changed".
> 
> The exact wording is
> 
> "The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.25.  Please verify if it still should be listed."
> 
> > Being more explicit about liking a reporter to report "yes, nothing 
> > changed" would probably be good if that IS what's wanted.
> 
> Well, I can change it to
> 
> "Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know."
> 
> if that's better.
> 

I would suggest that you should assume it's still relevant until the
bugzilla entry gets closed. The person fixing the bug should be
responsible for modifying the report to say that a patch is available
and then has been merged (or for saying it's an invalid report etc).

This way, you're making the whole process less burdensome rather than
so.

Regards,

Nigel

--
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/