linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] drm request 3

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:	Sat, 06 Mar 2010 12:21:18 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Daniel Stone <daniel@...ishbar.org>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, skeggsb@...il.com,
	airlied@...ux.ie, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, dri-devel@...ts.sf.net, mingo@...e.hu,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [git pull] drm request 3

On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:04:34 +0200, Daniel Stone said:

> So you're saying that there's no way to develop any reasonable body of
> code for the Linux kernel without committing to keeping your ABI
> absolutely rock-solid stable for eternity, no exceptions, ever? Cool,
> that worked really well for Xlib.

Amen to that.  I can remember the X10.4->X11 conversion in 1987. And a heck of
a lot of source-level stability since then (even with the libX11 getting redone
with libxcb under it. 23 years and still going strong is one hell of a good run
for an ABI.


Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped