Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> I know what you mean but Linus didn't accept patch... so don't say that
> it was irresponsible etc...
irresponsible was withdrawing the patch from the public, making a fuss out of it with an
exploit before we really understood it.
> But nobody cared about the patch and about the issue...
> (but I agree that Andre wasn't clear enough...)
Andre's clarity is partially because we don't easily comprehend what he's trying to say,
both sides need to have patience and work through it.
> > A good sysadmin should be terrified of script kiddies that can mutilate his system and
> > he has no way to protect himself because there isn't a fix yet.
>
> I'm talking about Linux/OpenSource world... good sysadmin can fix problem
> himself/herself... I _personally_ think that sysadmin without C/hacking
> skills can't be a good one...
Not all admins are capable of all code functions :) A great sysadmin knows how to do this.
A good sysadmin knows where to find a great sysadmin to help him ;) A bad sysadmin turns
the monitor off when something goes wrong and goes for lunch.
I've written code since the z80 and tinier days. I haven't had time to keep up and be
familiar with the latest and greatest instruction set or how the compiler works tho. Some
fixes require this knowledge. I.e. the F00F bug.
-d
-- "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 23 2000 - 21:00:17 EST