linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] Make SCSI SG v4 driver enabled by default and remove EXPERIMENTAL dependency, since udev depends on BSG.

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: <1247581336.4310.60.camel@mulgrave.site>
Date:	Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:22:16 -0400
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
Cc:	John Stoffel <john@...ffel.org>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Make SCSI SG v4 driver enabled by default and
 remove EXPERIMENTAL dependency, since udev depends on BSG.

On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 17:12 +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 07/14/2009 04:29 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 09:38 +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> >> On 07/13/2009 10:43 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
> >>>>>>>> "John" == John Stoffel <john@...ffel.org> writes:
> >>> Dammit, I messed up here sending this patch.  I've just edited the
> >>> subject line and re-sent it with a bit more description.  I think this
> >>> patch is perfectly good to go into 2.6.31 right now, esp since it's
> >>> not changing code, just whether the code is turned on by default from
> >>> now on.
> >>>
> >> I would like it if you'd also CC stable@...nel.org on this patch. As this
> >> condition is already true for distros in the field.
> > 
> > The stable tree is for bug *fixes*.   Moving an option out from under
> > experimental is basically an enhancement, even if it could be argued it
> > should have been done long ago.
> > 
> 
> wouldn't you consider it a bug if a low-level plumbing like Udev is shipped
> with hard dependency on it?

Sure .. file a bug with udev ...

The point is that if you use a feature marked "Experimental, do not use"
it's not a bug in the provider if you use it.

Arguably, all this really shows is that the distros ignore EXPERIMENTAL,
so it's not really serving a useful purpose in the kernel.

> if Udev was part of Kconfig it would have a "depend" on bsg. But because
> it's a different product it can only rely on defaults?

James


--
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/