> If Linus (or whoever) knows about the possible security implications of,
> let's say, 10 or 20% of the bugs, and only marked those the majority of
> security sensitive bug patches would just be ignored by would-be "experts"
stop that nonsense. you have zero evidence for it. in the previous thread a kernel developer only offered anecdotal evidence which is of course as good as mine or anyone else's. you might want to understand who patch users are too: http://lwn.net/Articles/374094/ . also you might want to explain why file system corruption bugs are marked as such in commit messages whereas there's no guarantee that unmarked commits don't fix file system corrupting bugs.
> A bug in the kernel is potentially extremely serious[...].
it depends on the bug. and as we learned from local experts here, it also depends on what one considers a bug at all ;).