On Sun, 23 Jul 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> James Sutherland <jas88@cam.ac.uk> said:
> [...]
> > I wouldn't put "not enabling self-destruct" in that category, though. You
> > might want a self-destruct facility on your machine - that's fine. Just do
> > NOT try to get it (kept) in the kernel for other people to hurt themselves
> > with.
>
> Please, get real. This is not ENABLE_SELF_DESTRUCT by a _very_ long
> shot. It is "Andre fears there are IDE disks with idiotic firmware that can
> be tricked to self-destruct out there, paper over the easier way to trigger
> this in Linux".
Let's rephrase that a little more accurately, shall we? "Andre knows
perfectly well that MOST disks out there will have their warranty
invalidated by running software which allows unrestricted access to the
RESERVED vendor-specific functions in the ATA spec."
Even MS protects their customers from this sort of damage. Failure to do
so is fscking stupid, dangerous, and likely to end up with dead penguins
lining the road. It's even possible that just running Linux on an IDE HDD
will void your warranty ATM - do you REALLY want that??
James.
-
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 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 21:00:15 EST