linux-kernel - Re: [stable] [0/9] 2.6.31.12-stable review

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: <4B533B33.5030800@pardus.org.tr>
Date:	Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:30:43 +0200
From:	Ozan Çağlayan <ozan@...dus.org.tr>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
CC:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	stable-review@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	stable@...nel.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [stable] [0/9] 2.6.31.12-stable review

Greg KH wrote:

>> Personally I really don't like the idea of "all users should really be
>> moving to .3x" which is true for individual bleeding edge users which
>> compiles and uses their own kernel but there are still distributions
>> around (as well as the one that I'm trying to maintain the kernel
>> part) which ships 2.6.31.
> 
> Distros can easily add additional patches to their kernel if they wish
> to keep the .31 kernel alive longer.  I am only one person, and can not
> maintain 3 different kernel trees and remain sane.

Yep I know, that's what I'm doing, I just want to make people aware of the problems. I somehow feel a little
bit guilty if I don't report some problems that I've spotted as downstream.

You're totally right, the maintenance of 1 kernel tree would be enough messy and time-consuming, I can't
even think about 3 trees..

> 
> You aren't the first to think that .31 would be a "long term" kernel.  I
> have never stated this, and I wonder where that rumor came from.

Well I thought that .29 would be that lucky one, and .30, and .31. Not something that I
heard from anyone :)

> 
> Yes, I will be maintaining the .32 kernel in a "long-term" manner.  I
> have mentioned it before to a number of people, but don't know if I've
> done any "official" announcement.  Things get lost in the lkml volume at
> times.

That's nice to hear about that.

> 
> Ok, to help you solve this issue, I will be willing to do one more .31
> release after this one.  Just send me the git commit ids of the patches
> you wish for me to include, and I will do so.
> 
> Sound good?

No that's not necessary at all. I didn't write that to push you for another release.
I just wanted to share my ideas and got reasonable answers from you.

Thanks again.
Ozan
--
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/