| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20100228071405.GA14205@elte.hu> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:14:05 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, roland@...hat.com, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de, hjl.tools@...il.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Linus <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: linux-next requirements * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote: > > - and without burdening developers to consider cases they have no good > > ways to test. Why should rare architectures be more important than those > > other rare forms of Linux usage? > > Because the Linus' tree is supposed to build on those architectures. [...] That's not actually true: Linus on multiple occasions has said that only the major architectures (x86, powerpc, ARM and a few others) are 'required' to build and that the others should be left to fail to build and should be _forced to get their act together_. > [...] As long as that's the case, linux-next should build on them too. No, and IMO linux-next is clearly over-interpreting this bit. Linux is not supposed to build on all architectures. Maybe that's a core bit of a misunderstanding (on either my or on sfr's side) and it should be clarified ... Ingo -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists