linux-kernel - Re: tip: bzip2/lzma now in tip:x86/setup-lzma

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]

Message-ID: <499D70CE.6050508@zytor.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Feb 2009 06:46:38 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Alain Knaff <alain@...ff.lu>
CC:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: tip: bzip2/lzma now in tip:x86/setup-lzma

Alain Knaff wrote:
> Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> Even if it is true in general, I would not remove CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE
> 
> Hmmm, but now that I think of it, maybe the CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE
> setting could be used to decide whether to compress initramfs.
> 
> If empty => do not compress builtin initramfs. It's only 950 bytes, and
> will be compressed along with the kernel anyways.
> 
> If not empty => use an additional config setting (let's call it
> CONFIG_INITRAMFS_COMPRESSION) to decide which compressor to use.
> 

No, that's at least potentially very wrong.  Let's not go down that rathole.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/