> > Alan, would you consider a v2.0.39 with just this fix (possibly something
> > else if something else has come up)?!
>
> If you want to become 2.0.x maintainer and fix this and the other chunk of
> bugs then be my guest. I don't really have time to worry about 2.0, 2.2 and
> 2.3.34.
Ok. As long as everyone else accepts it. What does the almighty penguin
say about this?
I REALLY need to know KNOW whether people accept me or not. I won't mind
being critised now, as long as complaints are laid out in a serious
manner. If any of you has anything on your minds that you don't want to
discuss openly on the list, feel free to reply privately.
(Oh, and what "other chunk of bugs" are you talking about?! If this chunk
is very great, I might get cold feet...)
> > There are a LOT of people still using v2.0.xx systems, and releasing a fix
> > would show them that we really care.
>
> Im working on the basis of only caring about external exploitable holes.
Well, that's rational, I can agree to that. Can't help that I'm a little
pedantic sometimes, I guess.
Then again, there are probably tons of ways to crash a v2.0.xx kernel that
won't get fixed. But this one has gotten quite some attention, that's why
I want it fixed. There are probably a few more such.
/David
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/