On Tue, 2016-08-23 at 09:40 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Luis Henriques <luis.henriq...@canonical.com> > Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 14:41:07 +0100 > > > Digging through some old CVEs I came across this one that doesn't > seem be > > in mainline. Was there a good reason for not being sent upstream? > Maybe it was > > rejected for some reason and I failed to find the discussion. > > Because the patch is completely bogus, and thus so is the CVE. > > The variable initializer clears out the entire structure. > > Until you can show compiler output from gcc that shows it not > initializing the structure I will not apply this patch because I know > that it faithfully does.
On some versions and architectures. Can you guarantee that you will notice when an exception appears? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings The program is absolutely right; therefore, the computer must be wrong.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
