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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 10:46:57 -0700 From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> To: Steven Noonan <steven@...inklabs.net> Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 01:16:38AM -0700, Steven Noonan wrote: > I believe some of Adrian's concerns are valid. Userspace programs will > indeed break, largely because some depend on build-time and run-time > checks for the kernel version being >=2.6.0 or >=2.4.0 and so forth. I > suspect the best way to prove userspace breakage would be to make a > branch of the kernel with a new versioning scheme (8.10, 2008.10, > whatever) and use that as the installed kernel while building a Gentoo > system. I suspect you'd see massive breakage. That would be trivial for me to test, IFF we want to do something like this. But again, that's a technical thing, that can be solved _IFF_ we want to change things. And that's my point here, do we want to change the current numbering scheme as people have expressed annoyances of the current one. thanks, greg k-h -- 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