From: Mr Dash Four <mr.dash.four@googlemail.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iproute2: lib/utils.c bug fixes
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:16:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51683347.1000806@googlemail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130412090231.7d8e9c6c@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:49:17 +0100
> Mr Dash Four <mr.dash.four@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 03:30:45 +0100
>>> Mr Dash Four <mr.dash.four@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> This patch fixes the following 3 bugs in get_u32/get_u64 functions:
>>>>
>>>> 1. On 32-bit systems, get_u32 could not detect an overflow.
>>>> get_u32(&l, "4294967296", 10) always returned 4294967295
>>>> (ULONG_MAX on 32-bit systems).
>>>>
>>>> 2. get_u64(&ll, "4294967295", 10) was returning an error where
>>>> it shouldn't have (4294967295 is perfectly legitimate value for
>>>> unsigned long long).
>>>>
>>>> 3. get_u64 couldn't detect an overflow errors (arg > ULLONG_MAX)
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mr Dash Four <mr.dash.four@googlemail.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I don't demand Developer Certificate of Origin on iproute2 patches.
>>> But if you are going to include it then you must use your real name,
>>> no pseudonyms. See kernel/Documentation/SubmittingPatches.
>>>
>>>
>> 1. You may or may not be aware that this isn't my first-and-only
>> contribution to the
>> Linux/Netfilter/Security/Audit/kernel/any_other_Linux_development_project_you_care_to_mention
>> tree in which I used my name above.
>> 2. How do you know that Dash Four isn't my name and is a "pseudonym" (do
>> you consider the name "Dotcom" not to be a real name too, simply because
>> in your, quite narrow-minded, understanding of the world this name
>> "looks a bit strange, therefore it must be a pseudonym")?
>> 3. The above text you were kind enough to point me to, is with regards
>> to kernel submissions. My patch does not alter the kernel tree in any
>> way whatsoever (but even if it has, see 1. above).
>>
>
> The issue is that "Signed-off-by" has a legal meaning as defined
> in the kernel SubmittingPatches
>
> <quote>
>
> Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1
>
> By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:
>
> (a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
> have the right to submit it under the open source license
> indicated in the file; or
>
> (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
> of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
> license and I have the right under that license to submit that
> work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
> by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
> permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
> in the file; or
>
> (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
> person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
> it.
>
> (d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
> are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
> personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
> maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
> this project or the open source license(s) involved.
>
> then you just add a line saying
>
> Signed-off-by: Random J Developer <random@developer.example.org>
>
> using your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms or anonymous contributions.)
> </quote>
>
> It was introduced during the SCO pre-trial paranoia phase to deal with
> the possibility of somebody putting something into kernel, then claiming it
> as proprietary.
>
> By putting on Signed-off-by: you are making a legal statement.
> Either resubmit without the Signed-off-by, or give a real name.
>
I am well-aware of what you just posted, as indicated in my initial
response you were kind enough to quote above. I would appreciate it if
you could address the points (1-3) I've made in response to that if you
disagree, or comment on the content of the actual submission if you
don't, so we can all move on. Thank you.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-12 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-12 2:30 [PATCH] iproute2: lib/utils.c bug fixes Mr Dash Four
2013-04-12 3:06 ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-04-12 13:49 ` Mr Dash Four
2013-04-12 14:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-12 14:38 ` Mr Dash Four
2013-04-12 15:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-12 15:25 ` Mr Dash Four
2013-04-12 15:45 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-04-12 16:15 ` Mr Dash Four
2013-04-12 16:21 ` Bjørn Mork
2013-04-12 16:02 ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-04-12 16:16 ` Mr Dash Four [this message]
2013-04-12 17:36 ` David Miller
2013-04-12 17:58 ` Mr Dash Four
2013-04-12 18:15 ` David Miller
2013-04-12 18:18 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-04-12 18:36 ` Mr Dash Four
2013-04-12 20:36 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51683347.1000806@googlemail.com \
--to=mr.dash.four@googlemail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).