[lkml]   [2000]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: TO HELL WITH IT THEN......(re: disk-destroyer.c)
"Mike A. Harris" wrote:

> An invalid TCP/IP packet however does not permanently destroy the
> ethernet card, no matter how badly it is screwed up. Nor does it
> fry anything else.
> IMHO, if something violates a standard in some way in kernel, it
> should be fixed if for no other reason than that. If something
> is a potentially dangerous, and lesser used feature that is added
> to the kernel, it should be CONFIG_SOMETHING so that it isn't
> there if it isn't needed.

And what about video cards? You can easily program the clocks to a value that
is likely to destroy or damage your monitor. Intelligent monitors handle this.
Old ones get smokey. If the hardware allows destructive commands to destroy it,
you need to support a different manufacturer.

Notwithstanding, I'm sure there's a lot of other hardware that allows you to
destroy it. How much effort should be spent to ensure such silliness isn't

After watching this thread for a while, I have to stand against adding code.
Perhaps I don't understand precisely what Andre is attending to, but I get the
gist of it. If it's something that can be patched it and we'll
all go on happily with a new kernel version not even knowing or caring that
something changed. If it can't be fixed, why waste time running around in


"The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an
eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was

org:<img src="">
title:Blue Labs Developer
fn:David Ford
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.229 / U:0.708 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site