[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1295447286.2008.850.camel@mojatatu>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:28:06 -0500
From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
arthur.marsh@...ernode.on.net, jengelh@...ozas.de,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: inbound connection problems when "netlink: test for all flags
of the NLM_F_DUMP composite" commit applied
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 21:55 +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 09:31:31PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > The combination that avahi uses makes no sense.
>
> I don't agree as explained in the reverting patch. Anyway, again,
> this is an old problem, so no reason to force "fixing" it just now
> at the expense of the obvious regression especially in stable kernels
> Anyway, I'll accept any David's decision wrt this problem.
>
So here is what i think the criteria should be:
If Avahi is popular and widely deployed (I dont use it anywhere), it
makes no sense to revert.
A middle ground is: instead of rejecting the nonsense passed, maybe a
sane thing to do is a kernel warning for a period of time (sort of like
feature removal warnings).
The only way to keep the patch IMO (if avahi is widely deployed) is if
common distro policy is such that they will immediately fix and
distribute a new avahi even when this breakage is with a kernel that
distro wont support for a year.
hope i am making sense.
cheers,
jamal
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists