Archives
Archives
| From: | Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Vanilla sources stabilization policy change | ||
| Date: | Wed, 07 Aug 2013 22:50:39 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20130807225032.31688.qmail@stuge.se | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Vanilla sources stabilization policy change by Greg KH |
||
| 1 | Greg KH wrote: |
| 2 | > See above for why it is not easy at all, and, why even if we do know |
| 3 | > some fixes are security ones, we would not tag them as such anyway. |
| 4 | |
| 5 | I think this supports the argument that the better kernel is always |
| 6 | the one with the most fixes. |
| 7 | |
| 8 | Rather than separating "bug fixes" from "security fixes" maybe it's |
| 9 | wiser to think about separating "fixes" from "features" - this may |
| 10 | be easier, but still not neccessarily easy. |
| 11 | |
| 12 | |
| 13 | //Peter |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Vanilla sources stabilization policy change | Greg KH <gregkh@g.o> |