On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:24:25PM -0300, Tiago Assumpcao wrote:I don't think we've ever heard any of the distro kernel engineers complain that there is a problem with how commits are documented in the upstream source. Keep in mind, the distro kernels are usually at least 6-9, to sometimes 18-24 months old. So many of the security bugs that show up in the developement kernels simply don't *apply* to the distro kernels; they security bugs simply aren't present in those older kernels. Of course, sometimes there are long-standing bugs. But I don't think the distro engineers have been complaining that they aren't finding out about them because they aren't marked <<------ SECURITY BUG HERE in big bold letters. And again, talking about something as if it were their ***duty*** is not a good way to pursuade people to do things in the open source world. The only guaranteed way to get something done in the open source is to help pay for it, or do it yourself. Sometimes you can convince others to do your work for you, but usually that requires some reciprocity in the long run. Regards, - Ted --
| Justin C. Sherrill | Re: dragonflybsd.org website link? |
| David Woodhouse | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 002/196] Chinese: rephrase English introduction in HOWTO |
| Eric Sandeen | Re: [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
git: | |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options |
| Patrick McHardy | [NET_SCHED 01/15]: sch_atm: fix format string warning |
