On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 13:04 -0500, John Richard Moser wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > What the hell? > > So instead of bringing something in that works, you bring something in > that does significantly less, and gives no savings on overhead or patch > complexity why? So you can later come out and say "We're so great now > we've increased the randomization by tweaking one variable aren't we > cool!!!"?
no it is called getting features in via a long incremental and debuggable patch series. Apparently you still don't understand that despite the long flamewar in that other thread. I can't think of any more I can do to explain to you why doing things in incremental steps is good on top of that. > > Red Hat is all smoke and mirrors anyway when it comes to security, just > like Microsoft. This just reaffirms that. I think you've been talking too much to another so called security expert that has been spouting similar words on full-disclosure recently. And I have to wonder.. where does Red Hat come in here? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
