Re: Ptrace hole / Linux 2.2.25

[Martin Hermanowski <martin@mh57.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1281 bytes --]

On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 09:36:28PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > Do not get me wrong, I think users can and should compile their own
> > > kernel if they want.  And as kernel developers, we should facilitate
> > > that.  But if someone requires handholding and instant or controlled
> > > releases of bug fixes, they either need to be able to rely on their own
> > > ability to get them or their vendor.  We have vendors for a reason,
> > > after all.
> > 
> > If that's people's attitude ("you should use a vendor"), then we
> > need a 
> 
> I believe sentence "you should use a vendor kernel" schould be banned
> on this list ;-).

ACK ;-)

> How badly would releasing 2.4.21 which does not have 2.4.20-preX as a
> parent mess version control systems?  

I guess this would make problems with the incremental patches.

I think putting an official patch for 2.4.20 closing the ptrace hole on
www.kernel.org should be no problem, and people compiling the kernel
themselves could easily use a correctly patched kernel. The main problem
(IMHO) is finding the correct patch. Even a link to the mail in the
archive might be sufficient.

(I hope this has not been suggested before, I was unsubsribed to lkml
for some days)

Regards,
Martin

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]