| 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: <20100406132622.GA1366@ucw.cz> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 15:26:22 +0200 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> To: Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.34-rc3: Can't insmod after make, because versions now differ?! On Tue 2010-04-06 15:00:31, Frans Pop wrote: > On Tuesday 06 April 2010, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Yes, but... should module version checking be fixed so that it does > > not interfere like that? > > I don't think so. Essentially you are getting what you configured: an > extremely fine-grained kernel version. It's up to you to decide whether > the benefits of that outweigh the limitations it brings. Yes, I want descriptive version strings. And yes, I'd like to use modules, and do development. Unfortunately, these two seem mutually exclusive. Given that Linus made noises (iirc) about 'everyone should set localversion_auto'... > Stripping parts of the kernel version for module compatibility checks could > interfere with suffixes explicitly added by distros to specify ABI > compatibility. So split the version into regular parts and very detailed parts, putting explicit user options into 'regular'? -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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