linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

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:   Sat, 1 Dec 2018 00:11:24 +0200
From:   Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>,
        James Hogan <jhogan@...nel.org>,
        Joshua Kinard <kumba@...too.org>,
        "open list:MIPS" <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug



On 30.11.18 г. 23:50 ч., Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:06:30PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>> I find it quite ridiculous that grown up people are engaging at yet
>> another coc-related conversation and are on the way to blowing it out of
>> proportions. Let's focus on improving the ACTUAL code what's the point
>> to bikeshed on the word?
>>
>> I've seen people before me comment that some comments are plainly out of
>> date and that warrants their removal but otherwise nitpicking things
>> like that. It seems common sense is very scant these days...
> 
> I have absolutely nothing against CoC.

I didn't mean you are against the CoC, I meant it's ridiculous to follow
it so closely.

And regarding 'fuck', I believe this is rather pertinent as to why this
patchset is unnecessary:

https://ia801406.us.archive.org/30/items/JackWagnerattr.MontyPythontheWordFuck/The_Word_Fuck.ogg

> 
> If you look up from LKML, there total zero posts from criticizing of
> having such. OK, maybe I find it bit too high-level, and yeah, this
> patch set has been useful to know where the line is. I can go through
> the commits and think more appropriate alternatives (thus the RFC-tag).
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> /Jarkko
>