Re: [stable] Linux

From: Gabor Gombas
Date: Wed Jul 16 2008 - 05:35:41 EST

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:01:51AM +0200, pageexec@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> very good example of how you actually do *not* do what you claim. find me
> the word 'security' in your announcement. it's not there. amazing, isn't it.
> despite what your fellow -stable maintainer claimed *he* would at least do
> (and regularly tries to do so in fact). despite what you yourself did on
> other occasions (remember what's wrong with you Greg? have you
> not been told and proven to cover up security bugs enough times already?

Huh? Have you read the announcement? If one do not understand from the
wording that this _is_ a security fix then he/she is stupid beyond hope.

And I see that the biggest difference between you and the kernel
developers: the kernel developers want you to _think_ whether that
particular patch is important for you or not. You on the other hand want
to be able to mindlessly apply patches marked as "security fix" without
any consideration about how all the other unfixed bugs can bite you.


MTA SZTAKI Computer and Automation Research Institute
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at