lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [patch] let CONFIG_SECCOMP default to n
    On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 05:54:02PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
    > Ehm I wasn't aware all linux vendors in the world owe that to you, or
    > that you own their kernel configuration

    I perfectly know nobody owes anything to me, I said I didn't expect it
    because it sounds very weird having to take an anti-fedora position in a
    project like CPUShare. Hope you didn't get it wrong because I'd be sad
    having opened this whole topic if you were wrong and SECCOMP was
    actually enabled in fedora.

    > I have no idea; I don't work there. Also I checked Fedora, not RHEL, and
    > Fedora is done by the Fedora project, not by Red Hat the company. If you
    > want to ask them to enable it, you should do so on the fedora-devel
    > mailing list

    Aren't Ingo and Alan Fedora? If they ask N in the main kernel, and they
    already set it to N in fedora I'm unsure what I should discuss further
    with them.

    And most of this whole thread is grossly offtopic, I'm amazed nobody
    complained yet about the questions they ask about cpushare legal details
    on this list, I guess it was entertaining enough for people not to
    complain just yet.

    I won't post more emails from my part... hope it helps reducing the
    noise.
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-07-11 18:15    [W:4.941 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site