linux-kernel - Re: CONFIG_VFAT_FS

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:	Wed, 8 Jul 2009 14:53:27 +0100
From:	Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
To:	Martin Steigerwald <Martin@...htvoll.de>
Cc:	tridge@...ba.org, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>,
	OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, john.lanza@...ux.com,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, corbet@....net,
	jcm@...masters.org, James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com
Subject: Re: CONFIG_VFAT_FS_DUALNAMES regressions

Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> I don't believe that Microsoft is still providing updates for Win98. But I 
> think Windows 2000 might still be in use

Definitely.  The mail server belonging to a company that pays me for
embedded Linux work runs on Windows 2000.  I moved it to a virtual
machine about 1 year ago - it's still in use.

> - I for example have a Win 2000 
> installation on my ThinkPad T23, although I didn't boot it for about a 
> year or so. Has it been tested against Windows 2000? I digged for the mail 
> where you said something about against which Windows versions you tested, 
> but I didn't find it anymore.

Heh.  I still use Windows 95 and Windows 98 occasionally.  I'm a bit
disappointed to find Samba no longer tests against them :-)

I wouldn't be surprised if Windows ME has fewer users than 98.  98 had
a reputation for being the best of the non-NT series.

> > When the vendor of an operating system doesn't even bother to display
> > a clean "sorry, you don't get updates any more" page for their OS then
> > I think it is safe to say that the operating system is dead and
> > buried.
> 
> It is safe to say much. But still users might not behave according to your 
> saying or might even not be able to. A potential customer asked us to 
> migrate a Windows 98 installation into a virtual machine, cause the 
> software that is running there would not run with any newer version of 
> Windows. Sometimes people are locked / forced to a specific Windows (or 
> Linux) version at least is they do not want to pay lots of $$$ to replace 
> their proprietary special hardware + software combination by something 
> which is supported on a newer version of an operating system. And for a 
> coincidence I think digital photos have been involved in that use case.

I think you've described commercial ancient Windows users.

But I suspect there are more non-commercial users - that ancient PC
someone has in their home which is good enough at running Word 2 for
_their_ word processing needs.  You know the sort of thing: ancient
14-inch CRT still going strong, friend probably replaced the disk 5
years ago and cloned the original working OS, fan's getting a bit
noisy but the old clunker isn't worth replacing just yet.

-- Jamie
--
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/