linux-kernel - Re: Linux 2.6.33-rc7

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:	Sat, 6 Feb 2010 14:49:49 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.33-rc7

On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> But we've certainly fixed a few things, and it's been a week, so here's 
> -rc7. I wish I could say that it's the last -rc, but I strongly doubt 
> that, and we'll almost certainly have at least one more.

Oh, and I forgot to ask one thing I had intended to ask in the release 
notes..

Do people really care about the old-fashioned tar.gz and patch.gz files? 
I've always uploaded the tar-files and patches compressed with gzip, 
because that's the "traditional" way, and then we have a script that also 
re-compresses things as 'bz2' because it compresses better and many people 
are bandwidth-limited and much prefer the better compression.

Of course, if you really care about bandwidth, you're better off just 
fetching the git trees instead, but the question for non-git users is: 

   Would it be ok to _only_ have the 'bz2' patches and tar-balls?

Having two copies of every large file seems silly, if nobody really 
requires the traditional .gz format..

		Linus
--
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/