netdev - Re: [PATCH] iproute2: lib/utils.c bug fixes

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]

Message-ID: <51683322.9060709@googlemail.com>
Date:	Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:15:30 +0100
From:	Mr Dash Four <mr.dash.four@...glemail.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iproute2: lib/utils.c bug fixes



Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 16:25 +0100, Mr Dash Four wrote:
>
>   
>> Now that we cleared this little nugget, can we move along please as the 
>> netdev forum isn't the appropriate place to discuss genders, name titles 
>> or sexual orientation - something I had no intention of doing (apologies 
>> to all who had to put up with this little diversion), but I felt I was 
>> dragged into this by your good self and Mr Hemminger. Thank you.
>>     
>
> Next time you submit a patch, think about how you can avoid this useless
> discussions by choosing an appropriate signature. (And no, I don't
> suggest you change your name !)
>   
Care to enlighten me what your definition of "appropriate signature" is 
exactly? I am expecting that your answer would include the appropriate 
guidelines used on this mailing list and *not* your personal opinion as, 
in this particular case, this is, or should be, irrelevant.

> And this is not a diversion, since I remember you had the same problems
> in the past.
Similar to above - care to point out (in terms of links to previous ML 
archives posts and so on) what "problems" did I, allegedly, have had in 
the past with patch submissions? Because, to my recollection, I did 
*not* have any such problems. If you can't point me to any such 
references, then I'd assume that you are simply on a smear trip with an 
agenda.

>  You perfectly know your signature is not very good, and you
> play with this. I can tell you its not funny.
>   
I don't "play" with my signature - I have been using it since I started 
contributing to open source projects and that signature never changed.

I would also like to know what do you find that it is "not very good" in 
my signature and what particular patch submission guidelines am I 
breaking with using it? Again, I am expecting that you will refer to the 
relevant guidelines for patch submissions approved on this list when 
forming your response and will extricate any personal bias or opinion.

Just to repeat again, so that it is clear - as far as my "signature" 
goes, I am not aware of any issues I have allegedly had in the past with 
patch submissions, so if you care to point out what these were, please 
do so. If not, kindly move on. Thank you.
--
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