linux-kernel - Re: XFS problem in 2.6.32

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:	Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:03:38 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....EDU>
Cc:	Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG <s.priebe@...fihost.ag>,
	david@...g.hm, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: XFS problem in 2.6.32

> > That was what i thoght. So a bug like this should get fixed right? Otherwise this makes no sense. Sadly Redhat has ported the fix back in his RHEL 6 2.6.32 kernel but they haven't send the patch to stable / vanilla team.

It's often not that simple. As vendor trees diverge you may find it's not
a case of 'sending patch X upstream' because the patches you need may
well depend upon other things in the vendor tree not all of which will be
in the 'stable' tree. So it's a base at best.

> Not all distributions will participate in the maintenance stable tree.  Red Hat for example is probably worried about people  (specifically, Oracle) taking their kernel expertise "for free" and bidding it against them.

Judging from the commit log that isn't the case.

Besides which I hear a rumour that oracle employees have learned how to
download files from other websites and look at the content so it won't
make any odds 8)

Alan
--
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/