Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for December 5, 2013
Deadline scheduling: coming soon?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 27, 2013
ACPI for ARM?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 21, 2013
If P does imply Q, then not-Q really does imply not-P. Did you instead mean that it doesn't follow that "not-P implies not-Q"?
That would make more sense in this case since "commits marked with a CVE number fix security vulnerabilities" does not imply that "commits without a CVS number do not fix security vulnerabilities".
Kernel.org's road to recovery
Posted Oct 10, 2011 4:44 UTC (Mon) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458)
Presumably he meant "P implies Q" is not the same as "not P implies not Q."
Posted Oct 10, 2011 9:24 UTC (Mon) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds