Handling kernel security problems
Posted Jul 16, 2008 22:38 UTC (Wed) by pr1268
In reply to: Handling kernel security problems
Parent article: Handling kernel security problems
> and then graduated to l-k later on
I suppose Pax Team finally got the message Greg K-H was trying to make. Of course, Pax Team still kept on during the LWN 22.214.171.124 release announcement.
While I agree with Pax Team's philosophy that software bugs should be categorized on their severity (in order to help sysadmins, distro developers, and end-users prioritize updates), I feel that it's more important that the kernel developers not be bothered with having to do this taxonomy. As Linus said recently, "A bug is a bug." There are other groups, organizations, enterprise-level software distributors, and such whose task is to assess the severity impact of software bugs.
(Disclosure: I've also asked on LWN about the recent rash of bugfix releases to 2.6.25 and requested clarification of the "strongly encouraged" verbiage I keep hearing in Greg's announcements.)
I think Pax Team has heard the best answer he's going to get from the kernel devs. If he keeps up the flamewar, then likely it's because he hasn't heard an answer that he likes.
to post comments)