lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Does anybody try to compile the 2.3 kernels at all ? :((
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Sergey Kubushin wrote:
>
> > Please don't think I'm a dumb newbie :((
>
> Don't worry, nobody thinks that you are a newbie.
>
> > I can tell that latest _STABLE_ kernel is 2.1.125 which does run our primary
> > NS with several thousands zones having a 294 days uptime now. 2.2.xx is beta,
>
> H-u-h??? OK. OK. Let's... No, it would be wrong.
> Sergey, I hate to break it on you, but there were security holes in this
> kernel. Plenty of them. No kidding. And they are well-known. IOW, taking
> your box down (after you've gave IP address to everyone) would take a
> couple of minutes, allowing for potentially shitty line.

It's well defended :)) The only service visible to the outside world is NS.
All the packets leaves the system with an address which is not even an
ethernet. Actually, it's one of loopback adresses.

And EVERY host with ANY system can be taken down with e.g. ReGet in fully
legitimate fashion.

> > 2.3.xx is pre-prealpha. Please don't tell than it's development etc., please
> > do try to explain how can one pretend he's developing some driver (e.g. RAID)
> > if this driver does not even compile ? I can understand buggy and unstable
> > drivers, but please do try to explain how can the driver which has one of
> > the files missing be developed and patched ? How can one make and send any
> > patches if the driver is incomplete ?
>
> Three words: merge in progress. If you want to stand up and call Ingo a
> liar - go ahead and do it. Otherwise, kindly shut the hell up.

I wanna tell once more that I'm not for a blood. And I don't want to call
anybody a liar. I'm just pretty sure that e.g. for RAID5 that xor.c is
simply forgotten. It's not a rocket science to notice that this file is
included in a Makefile and missing in a source tree. I'm sure this is the
trivial omission. I'm just wonder why haven't somebody spotted it? And I can
sketch the scenario how can all that code be compileable on Ingo's machine
and not compileable by anyone else :)) Sorry if I hit somebody - I did no
want to. Nothing personal, just business :))

But I wanna know what lies behind the changed /proc/*/cmdline. Can anybody
throw some light? It's definitely wrong and have to be fixed in one place in
kernel rather than fixing several dozens decent apps using setproctitle().
Does anybody know what the hell it have been done for?

===========================================================================
Sergey Kubushin aka the Tamer < > The impossible we do immediately.
e-mail: ksi@ksi-linux.com SK320-RIPE < > Miracles require 24-hour notice.
===========================================================================


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:0.116 / U:1.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site