On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:01:51AM +0200, pageexec@freemail.hu wrote:No, it was a consious decision to do just to piss you off, glad to see it worked :) Come on, give me a break, Tiago asked that we do releases as soon as we know about a security problem. 2.6.25.11 was released because of this, and all users were told to upgrade. Is the fact that I add the magic word "security" in a sentance in the email some specific requirement that will make you happy? Take a look at the words I used, if someone can't determine if they should upgrade or not based on that, then they need to rely on a company to provide updates for them, and not be running their own kernels because they really have no clue about system management. Bah, what a joke. greg k-h --
| Parag Warudkar | BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 15s! [swapper:0] |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 010/196] Chinese: add translation of Codingstyle |
| Andrew Morton | -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 24/37] dccp: Processing Confirm options |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Alexey Dobriyan | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| david | Re: iptables very slow after commit 784544739a25c30637397ace5489eeb6e15d7d49 |
