[lkml]   [2011]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Linux 3.0-rc1
    On Mon, 30 May 2011 20:33:29 -0000, Mustapha Rabiu said:
    > Linus Torvalds <torvalds <at>> writes:
    > >
    > > Yay! Let the bikeshed painting discussions about version numbering
    > > begin (or at least re-start).
    > >
    > > I decided to just bite the bullet, and call the next version 3.0. It
    > > will get released close enough to the 20-year mark, which is excuse
    > > enough for me, although honestly, the real reason is just that I can
    > > no longe rcomfortably count as high as 40.
    > >
    > Unsurprising, however, congratulations on yet another major release!
    > We applaud the fact that it'll be just as hideous as 2.6.x, without any
    > new or modified features. Might you explain why you didn't just
    > use 2.8.x ?
    > Also, given that multiple people have asked for a handful of things
    > to be merged into the kernel, re: security, I'm puzzled about how
    > you managed to develop this self-styled 'alpha-male' based versioning
    > scheme without addressing unsettling discrepancies such
    > as /proc/pid/auxv, /proc/pid/stack and /proc/pid/syscall based
    > info-leaks or slub cache merging, etc, all of which have been publicly
    > discussed over varying periods of time, (circa ~2008)

    We can come back and revisit those issues after we get done fixing
    *all* the software that made a blind assumption that the kernel
    release number matches '2\.[46]\.[0-9]+' (said assumption being
    broken at *both* ends by a 3.0 release.

    I have to agree with Linus on this one - if we're ruling out ABI-breaking
    changes, we want to make this kernel release as little different as
    we can.
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-05-30 22:53    [W:0.030 / U:17.920 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site