Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755350AbYJPQI2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:08:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753500AbYJPQIT (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:08:19 -0400 Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:42481 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751517AbYJPQIT (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:08:19 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:47:26 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Adrian Bunk , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Kernel version numbering scheme change Message-ID: <20081016154726.GA6331@kroah.com> References: <20081016002509.GA25868@kroah.com> <20081016124943.GE23630@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20081016151748.GA31075@kroah.com> <20081016153053.GJ5834@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081016153053.GJ5834@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1402 Lines: 32 On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:30:53AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Greg KH (greg@kroah.com) said: > > Distros properly patch things and backport "urgent OpenSSL security > > updates" to older versions of packages, so they would not run into this > > problem. > > > > Newer releases would run into this problem, but as almost all distros > > have huge, easy to run, build systems, a change like this would show up > > immediately and be fixed in a matter of hours, with the needed fixes > > being pushed upstream to the various packages as needed. > > > > So I really don't think this is much of a problem. > > > > It's interesting that openssl doesn't just check for Linux 1.x and > > assumes that Linux 9.23.12 will work just fine with what they are doing :) > > Is it really worth the effort of having any such upstream have to > quickly patch and release, when the only benefit listed (earlier in > this thread) was to inform people how old their kernel is? If we switch to a consecutive numbering scheme, which doesn't show the "age" of the kernel, we would still have to patch such packages, so I don't see the big difference. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/