[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190108000854.GD3987@latitude>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 01:08:54 +0100
From: Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@....net>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@....net>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/sys.c: Fix UNAME26 for 5.0
On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 10:10:31AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:03 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer
> <j.neuschaefer@....net> wrote:
> >
> > UNAME26 is a mechanism to report Linux's version as 2.6.x, for
> > compatibility with old/broken software. Because of the way it is
> > implemented, it needs to be adjusted to handle version 5.0.
>
> Do we actually need this?
I don't run any such old software, so I don't have a strong opinion
here; I just sent this patch because I knew UNAME26 version strings
would jump back without it.
> I'd rather let it bitrot, and just let it return random versions. It
> will just start again at 2.4.60, won't it?
Correct.
(Well, it's 2.6, not 2.4, but yes)
> Anybody who uses UNAME26 for a 5.x kernel might as well think it's
> still 4.x. The user space is so old that it can't possibly care about
> differences between 4.x and 5.x, can it?
>
> The only thing that matters is that it shows "2.4.<largeenough>",
> which it will do regardless.
Good point, I guess that's a valid appraoch.
Jonathan Neuschäfer
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists