On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Tiago Assumpcao wrote:Umm. That shouldn't be our worry. If others had a long and involved (and broken) process, they should be the ones that track the fixes too. We weren't involved, we didn't see that, we simply _cannot_ care. Umm. What was wrong with 20 years ago exactly? Are you talking about all the wonderful work that the DNS people did for that new bug, and how they are heroes for synchronizing a fix and keeping it all under wraps? And isn't that the same bug that djb talked about and fixed in djbdns from the start? Which he did about ten YEARS ago? Excuse me for not exactly being a huge fan of "security lists" and best practices. They seem to be _entirely_ be based on PR and how much you can talk up a specific bug. No thank you, Linus --
| Jan Engelhardt | intel iommu (Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Rafael J. Wysocki | Re: Linux 2.6.27-rc5: System boot regression caused by commit a2bd7274b47124d2fc4d... |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
