From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: kennethadammiller@gmail.com (Kenneth Adam Miller)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 09:20:41 -0400
Subject: Safety in Kernel Development
In-Reply-To: <55D42ED4.5060005@mrbrklyn.com>
References: <CAK7rcp93Jvy73RxDLKnMgMBoiYz75P5pii6v=nXhZhWEArrRmw@mail.gmail.com>
	<55D3B157.50106@mrbrklyn.com>
	<CAK7rcp9fzmU28iJEFdbTD2Z5h8wgaGSHoJXDNEy_4QVcGJx=Nw@mail.gmail.com>
	<55D42ED4.5060005@mrbrklyn.com>
Message-ID: <CAK7rcp86=3Fm_yCN-qzC5EQwOMy7edN2P+nzFHHeUXqn8g2v1g@mail.gmail.com>
To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org
List-Id: kernelnewbies.lists.kernelnewbies.org

Ok, agreed. I hadn't known that much - I apologize for getting this to the
wrong list. I've not at all proposed any kernel overhaul effort, only how
to affect my own code. :)


Thank you to all mentors who gave advice. :)

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:23 AM, Ruben Safir <ruben@mrbrklyn.com> wrote:

> On 08/18/2015 08:30 PM, Kenneth Adam Miller wrote:
> > | "this is not a rational approach"
> >
> > I'm very strongly confident the approach of achieving stronger guarantees
>
>
> Off topic
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20150819/04b03484/attachment.html