Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 9, 2013
-- Al Viro is back.
Quote of the week
Posted Apr 7, 2006 18:17 UTC (Fri) by stock (guest, #5849)
Here's the diff
for early bird
patchees from the commitdiff page from the kernel.org git repository. In
there we see that some drunken kernel master made a stupid typo. Instead
of "count = PAGE_SIZE - 1;" its written "count =
PAGE_SIZE;". Next the total linux media madness like vnu goes
Now go check on your linux src 2.6.x trees whats inside fs/sysfs/file.c ,
and you will see that only inside 2.6.16 this typo by Linus can be found
back. Manually patching is rather simple and straight forward here, but
if your a obedient RedHat update(er) you will have to make some massive
actions this weekend.
The debian crowd is sneering
away : "Ohh we the mighty boys of debian run 2.4.x and are not
affected by this!! The 2.6.xx crowd yet again has to spend an entire
I heard someone even claim: " i stick with the 2.0.38 kernel, its the
only one I can be sure that contains no stolen SCO code"
This kernel.org git repository of the linux source code tree sure looks
like a nifty tool to me. I would even call this GIT the "Apres mois la
deluge" upload site ([tm]Kevin Mitnick), for companies like SUN, IBM,
HP/Compaq... you name em. Then again, during the years 2000/2001 SCO was
basicly doing the SAME thing.
The git source pool of Linux code is even what i would call the perfect
"do not resist, we Borg will assimilate all your code" upload
button. Because as was reported on lwn.net : any uploader of code must
agree that the linux kernel masters WILL adjust the coding typing style
of all your precious code !! In effect any genuine original code will
NEVER EVER be found back or identified as such. Now compare that to the
honest methods of SCO, replacing inside genuine UNIX header code, (c)1988
AT&T only with the copyright comments of the SCO group, leaving the
rest of the code untouched!
Posted Apr 7, 2006 18:50 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
And anyone sticking with 2.0.38 is a maniac or has *really* peculiar requirements (avoiding `stolen code' that doesn't exist naturally counts as peculiar!)
And as for your last strange paragraph, well, per-person `code ownership' is loose in any multi-person free software project once something is contributed; you have to expect the other devs will hack at it too. This is a feature.
Posted Apr 10, 2006 12:26 UTC (Mon) by arafel (subscriber, #18557)
Posted Apr 18, 2006 21:42 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
Posted Apr 13, 2006 4:14 UTC (Thu) by pm101 (guest, #3011)
(The kernel of choice for people with low-memory systems. Or who want to be able to go through the kernel configuration script by hand in a reasonable amount of time. Or who want their kernels to almost always compile once configured (assuming the right version of the toolchain). Or who want to avoid the bugs, crashes, and data corruption associated with running the no-longer-odd-numbered unstable devel series kernels of the 2.6 era. Although I agree; 2.2 or 2.4 is better for most applications).
Posted Apr 18, 2006 21:45 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
(Major data-corruption events experienced here with 2.6: 0.
Major data-corruption events experienced here with 2.4: 1.
2.6 even kept running with RAM so faulty that md5sums of 10Mb files returned different values each time.
Does my anecdote defeat your anecdote?)
Quote of the week / 22.214.171.124 as well
Posted Apr 7, 2006 19:09 UTC (Fri) by didierj.richard (guest, #142)
Reading Robert's message I felt confident this afternoon's upgrade to 126.96.36.199 was the safe choice. Unfortunately I checked according to Robert's message and found 188.8.131.52 was affected as well :
# grep "PAGE_SIZE" /usr/src/linux-184.108.40.206/fs/sysfs/file.c
BUG_ON(count > (ssize_t)PAGE_SIZE);
if (count >= PAGE_SIZE)
count = PAGE_SIZE;
I am no C expert, but this sounds like the CVE statement : "2.6.12 and further"
Copyright © 2006, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds