On 7/9/2012 12:56 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Back to my initial question, am I right to assume that
> CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR is no longer experimental and can be enabled in
> distribution kernels?
it HAS been enabled in distribution kernels for YEARS.
so yes.
--
To unsubscribe from this list:
Le lundi 09 juillet 2012 à 09:56 +0200, Jean Delvare a écrit :
> As for options still depending on EXPERIMENTAL when they no longer
> should, this can partly be explained when the EXPERIMENTAL dependency
> doesn't show up in the short description. This is the case of
> CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR. As
Hi all,
Le vendredi 06 juillet 2012 à 22:19 +0200, Paul Bolle a écrit :
> On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 10:58 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > I rather just retire the whole concept of "Experimental".
> >
> > it's really utterly meaningless in practice anyway.
>
> See Russell King's quick survey in
Hi all,
Le vendredi 06 juillet 2012 à 22:19 +0200, Paul Bolle a écrit :
On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 10:58 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
I rather just retire the whole concept of Experimental.
it's really utterly meaningless in practice anyway.
See Russell King's quick survey in
Le lundi 09 juillet 2012 à 09:56 +0200, Jean Delvare a écrit :
As for options still depending on EXPERIMENTAL when they no longer
should, this can partly be explained when the EXPERIMENTAL dependency
doesn't show up in the short description. This is the case of
CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR. As
On 7/9/2012 12:56 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
Back to my initial question, am I right to assume that
CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR is no longer experimental and can be enabled in
distribution kernels?
it HAS been enabled in distribution kernels for YEARS.
so yes.
--
To unsubscribe from this list:
On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 10:58 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> I rather just retire the whole concept of "Experimental".
>
> it's really utterly meaningless in practice anyway.
See Russell King's quick survey in https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/1/18/397 :
almost all defconfigs had CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL
On 7/6/2012 10:57 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Randy,
>
> Le vendredi 06 juillet 2012 à 10:23 -0700, Randy Dunlap a écrit :
>> On 07/06/2012 07:08 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
>>
>>> This feature has been around for over 5 years now, so I presume it is
>>> no longer considered experimental.
>>>
>>>
Hi Randy,
Le vendredi 06 juillet 2012 à 10:23 -0700, Randy Dunlap a écrit :
> On 07/06/2012 07:08 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
>
> > This feature has been around for over 5 years now, so I presume it is
> > no longer considered experimental.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar
On 07/06/2012 07:08 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> This feature has been around for over 5 years now, so I presume it is
> no longer considered experimental.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare
> Cc: Ingo Molnar
> Cc: Arjan van de Ven
> Cc: Andi Kleen
> ---
> Or is there any reason to still consider
On 07/06/2012 07:08 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
This feature has been around for over 5 years now, so I presume it is
no longer considered experimental.
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare jdelv...@suse.de
Cc: Ingo Molnar mi...@redhat.com
Cc: Arjan van de Ven ar...@linux.intel.com
Cc: Andi Kleen
Hi Randy,
Le vendredi 06 juillet 2012 à 10:23 -0700, Randy Dunlap a écrit :
On 07/06/2012 07:08 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
This feature has been around for over 5 years now, so I presume it is
no longer considered experimental.
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare jdelv...@suse.de
Cc: Ingo
On 7/6/2012 10:57 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
Hi Randy,
Le vendredi 06 juillet 2012 à 10:23 -0700, Randy Dunlap a écrit :
On 07/06/2012 07:08 AM, Jean Delvare wrote:
This feature has been around for over 5 years now, so I presume it is
no longer considered experimental.
Signed-off-by: Jean
On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 10:58 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
I rather just retire the whole concept of Experimental.
it's really utterly meaningless in practice anyway.
See Russell King's quick survey in https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/1/18/397 :
almost all defconfigs had CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL
14 matches
Mail list logo
