linux-kernel - Re: Partition check considered as error is breaking mounting in 2.6.27

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:	Fri, 12 Sep 2008 14:21:37 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To:	Bob Copeland <me@...copeland.com>
cc:	Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski <herton@...driva.com.br>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	<bogdano@...driva.com.br>,
	"Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino" <lcapitulino@...driva.com.br>
Subject: Re: Partition check considered as error is breaking mounting in
 2.6.27

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008, Bob Copeland wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> >> I don't know if this change of behaviour in 2.6.27 is desired (not creating
> >> partition nodes if its size exceeds media size).
> >
> > I have to believe that it _is_ desired.  Why else would that commit
> > have been merged?
> 
> Several people objected to similar patches when they were posted on
> LKML in the past, usually for the reason "this breaks my forensics use
> case."  I guess no one objected this time around.
> 
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=116069718613683&w=2
> 
> (I don't have an opinion, I'm just providing collective memory.)

Well, Herton can object and ask to have the offending commit reverted.

Alan Stern

--
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/