Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: stabilization policies
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 14:27:43
Message-Id: 5214CE67.3000608@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: stabilization policies by Tom Wijsman
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA256
3
4 On 21/08/13 08:36 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
5 >
6 > Given the kernel volume, I think even CVE's don't cover
7 > everything...
8 >
9
10 Kernel is really a special case here, imo -- emerge doesn't install
11 kernels, it just provides their sources. End-users still need to
12 build the kernel to use them and I expect there are plenty that don't,
13 at least, not as soon as the sources are installed. And really,
14 portage is just providing kernel sources for convenience; anybody can
15 download a kernel by hand, extract it to /usr/src, and build it with
16 no ill effect on portage or the rest of their system.
17
18 That's not to say that gentoo-sources shouldn't follow the regular
19 overall stabilization policies, but focusing on the kernel as the
20 impetus for adjusting the stabilization policy or pointing out what's
21 wrong with the policy as a whole seems to be a bad use-case for this
22 discussion.
23 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
24 Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)
25
26 iF4EAREIAAYFAlIUzmcACgkQ2ugaI38ACPB07gD+Ps0gTO/gqgZQXMUCtcmXWw1/
27 Bv6n5HeDQD21qo59rxoA/21DZ8zUkpGSJIOldB8uL+zXTUhzbadvtdhrCJoelT4Q
28 =69yu
29 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: stabilization policies Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: stabilization policies Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>