[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whmk3EnmFU6XbLjMZW_ZBU8UJGDEyua7m5Aa3pmgtVQRg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 10:13:39 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
paul@...l-moore.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] capability: add cap_isidentical
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 1:29 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> That said, the old code was worse. The only redeeming feature of the
> old code was that "nobody has touched it in ages", so it was at least
> stable.
Bah. I've walked through that patch something like ten times now, and
decided that there's no way it breaks anything. Famous last words.
It also means that I don't want to look at that ugly old code when I
have the fix for it all, so I just moved it over from my experimental
tree to the main tree, since it's still the merge window.
Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi, or something.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists