linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Add CONFIG_VFAT_NO_CREATE_WITH

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: <1241453259.20170.17.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 04 May 2009 11:07:39 -0500
From:	Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, tridge@...ba.org,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>,
	Ogawa Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add CONFIG_VFAT_NO_CREATE_WITH_LONGNAMES option

On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 08:59 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 09:08 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 07:39:19AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 07:21:19AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >> > > Bringing the patch to a public mailing list is a waste of time until
> >> > > there's a reliable description of the problem you're trying to solve.
> >> > 
> >> > Please see the original patch.  It does describes what it is doing.
> >> 
> >> "What", but not "Why".  Which is only acceptable in GNU changelogs ;-)
> >
> > Please understand the "Why" is a sticky subject that we can't and won't
> > discuss in a public forum.  However, we believe the maintainers
> > understand the "Why" of it well enough to consider whether or not to
> > include such a patch.  The "What" should be pretty clear from the patch
> > description.  The "How" is a technical question that can be discussed
> > here.
> 
> If the "Why" can not be discussed then you don't have a "Why" you can
> stand behind.

That's for the maintainers to decide.  If they agree it has worth, maybe
it's a good idea to answer "How".

> If you don't have a "Why" you can stand behind the "Why" sucks and does
> not appear to be an appropriate justification for a patch applied to
> a public piece of code.

You're entitled to your opinion.
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center

--
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/