[2497] in SIPB_Linux_Development
Re: Kernel interface changes (was Re: cdrecord problems on
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Khimenko Victor)
Thu Feb 4 21:43:16 1999
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 05:41:03 +0300 (EET)
From: Khimenko Victor <khim@sch57.msk.ru>
To: Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Arvind Sankar <arvinds@MIT.EDU>, xiphmont@MIT.EDU,
alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu,
linux-dev@MIT.EDU, jered@MIT.EDU, nemo@MIT.EDU, cox@idecnet.com
In-Reply-To: <sjmzp6tbmrn.fsf@datkins.ihtfp.org>
On 4 Feb 1999, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Khimenko Victor <khim@sch57.msk.ru> writes:
>
> > Why you must rebuild 1000's of client machines ? You should compile kernel
> > anyway to make upgrade -- why not compile all needed modules as well ????
>
> Because they don't have the source for those modules -- the company
> that created them have the source.
>
How rebuild of 1000's of client machines will help if you do not have
sources ?
> > Unfortunatelly not. I'm could kill ANY WindowsNT system without Admin or
> > even Power User access just by doing some nasty things with DDE. Why it's
> > not fixed ? "Oh, this will break so many programs..."
>
> So, change it during the development cycle; Linux 2.1 is the perfect
> time for things like that. However, once 2.2 is released, hold it and
> wait until 2.3.
>
IMO (and Alan's AFAIK) such things (when any user of system or, even
worse, someone on the net, could kill your server SHOULD be fixed in
STABLE kernel when found EVEN if this will break binary compatibility).
When there are no security implication this could wait, of course...
