linux-kernel - Re: stable? quality assurance?

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: <1278866043.2538.140.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Sun, 11 Jul 2010 18:34:03 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	William Pitcock <nenolod@...eferenced.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: stable? quality assurance?

Le dimanche 11 juillet 2010 à 19:58 +0400, William Pitcock a écrit :
> ----- "Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Something like 2.6.32.16 : Its probably more stable than all 2.6.X
> > kernels.
> 
> 2.6.32.16 (possibly 2.6.32.15) has a regression where it is unusable
> as a Xen domU.  I would say 2.6.32.12 is the best choice since who knows
> what other regressions there are in .16.
> 

Yea, strictly speaking, you can be sure no kernel will be bug free,
ever.

This is why I said "probably more stable" ;)

--
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/