Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:35:08 -0400 | From | John Richard Moser <> | Subject | Re: My thoughts on the "new development model" |
| |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Theodore Ts'o wrote: | On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 09:48:01AM -0400, John Richard Moser wrote: | |>I for one don't give a damn. Bugs and how fast this development model |>fix them aren't a concern to me; although I'd never slow down the bug |>fixing process. My concern is getting a real stable tree for various |>maintainers to base on, so that various patches for drivers, security |>enhancements, and other things aren't scattered across versions and |>impossible to patch together even when they're noninvasive to eachother. |> |>Have you stopped to consider that the features that are critical to me |>are also holding me back from upgrading to the newer kernels? |>Ironically, these are security features, and the newer kernels have |>newer security fixes aside from new schedulers and other toys I could |>really enjoy having around. | | | So instead of kvetching, why don't you | | (a) Create your own stable series by snapshotting some 2.6.x tree | every six months, and then maintain a set of bug-fix only patches | against that 2.6.x tree? Then convince the security people to port to | that particular 2.6.x-jrm tree? |
- - Convince the security people - -- PaX, GrSecurity (2.6.7) - -- LIDS (2.6.8.1) (not my problem) - -- RSBAC (The author works his ass off, 2.6.6-9) - - Convince VM hacker projects - -- linuxcompressed is dead anyway; but they'd have a hard time keeping ~ up; there's been VM changes a few times already ne? - - Convince filesystem and driver projects. No particular examples, ~ although I could see things happening that would affect them (another ~ reason why we need a fully upwards-compatible driver ABI)
| (b) Convince the security folks to try to get their patches into the | mm- tree, for eventual inclusion into 2.6. |
I've tried that. They don't want to. I don't blame them.
What I *am* aiming for is getting a few security enhancements included in mainline for several Linux distributions, starting with Debian and Ubuntu. This will predictibly create a blockage at 2.6.7 (where PaX/GRSec are, since those are a major part of the scheme); they won't be able to upgrade past there without losing a major protection, and the authors will likely continue to simply sit around and wait for 2.6 to stop changing so damn much.
| (c) Some combination of the two. | | Either would probably be more likely to fulfill your needs than just | whining about it. | | - Ted | - | To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in | the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org | More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html | Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |
- -- All content of all messages exchanged herein are left in the Public Domain, unless otherwise explicitly stated.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFBf8AshDd4aOud5P8RAjwtAJ4je6e8ubxmnMJexVY0Db6JSNRPLwCeMvNY HjEB1Ve+ZSdToiwPOsMJWnM= =DJkR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |