linux-kernel - Re: [2.6.28.x FIX] CONFIG_FILE_LOCKING should not depend on CONFIG

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: <20090611024641.GA19767@suse.de>
Date:	Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:46:41 -0700
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Tomáš Szépe <szepe@...erecords.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6.28.x FIX] CONFIG_FILE_LOCKING should not depend on
	CONFIG_BLOCK

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 04:40:19AM +0200, Tomáš Szépe wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Fix: CONFIG_FILE_LOCKING should not depend on CONFIG_BLOCK.
> Patch against 2.6.28.10.
> 
> inlined please find a trivial fix that makes it possible to run
> complete systems out of an initramfs on 2.6.28.10 again (this
> broke somewhere between 2.6.27 and 2.6.28).

2.6.28 is no longer supported, sorry.

Is this an issue in 2.6.29 or 2.6.30?

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/