linux-kernel - Re: linux-arm-kernel useless for development (was Re: Your message to Linux-arm-kernel awaits moderator approval)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 6 Aug 2009 12:55:53 +0100
From:	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
	mouw@...linux.org
Subject: Re: linux-arm-kernel useless for development (was Re: Your message
	to Linux-arm-kernel awaits moderator approval)

On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 01:02:47PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Thu 2009-08-06 11:44:21, Russell King wrote:
> 
> > It appears the answer to that is no.  People are free to subscribe to
> > the one on vger, where they won't have to "put up" with me.  However,
> > it seems that people much prefer to subscribe to my lists, because that
> > seems to be where the expertise is.
> > 
> > Moreover,
> > 
> > (a) when ever you have a problem, you go shouting and making public
> > accusations without trying first to resolve the problem in private.
> 
> When I tried asking in private, I was told to stop complaining or loose
> my mailing list subscription. I'd prefer not to make that mistake again.

... in response to your whinging about the "headers matched a filter
rule" mailman whining.  I had enough of your whinging and whining in
April, and I've certainly had enough now.  But guess what?  The
problem eventually got fixed after working out what was going on.

> > (c) you really don't understand that "held for moderation" is *not*
> > rejection, but merely a case of mailman spotting something it doesn't
> > like and letting a *human* deal with it rather than out-right rejecting
> > it.
> 
> For lakml, held for moderation _does_ mean it will return with
> "posting rejected: no reason given" in few days. I have never seen any
> other result, and have got perfectly reasonable messages rejected with
> "no reason". So no, I do not believe there's cooperative human being
> moderating lakml.

http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20090730.090827.654305e1.en.html

is your message that you're currently stiring the shit about.  Oh
look, it's in the archives.  Oh, that means it must have been
let through.

> > I wonder, do you even know what happened to the message you're whinging
> > about?  Would you prefer that your message was silently dropped into
> > /dev/null instead of having a chance of the issue being resolved?  It
> > strikes me that _that_ would be a better solution than all your
> > whinging.
> 
> So... your solution to broken mailing list is to silence everyone who
> complains?

No.  My solution would have been to fix the mailing list had you not
made this a public issue in an offensive way.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:
--
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/