Re: BUG FOUND: Re: Potentially serious problem with kernel-headers...
> > >Calling the HDIO_GET_IDENTITY ioctl() (a published interface to the
> > >ide subsystem) will cause a 2.0.33 or before application to trash its
> > >data segment/stack under 2.0.34.
> >
> > Okay, will anyone with a mirror of the Debian sources volunteer to
> > start a job that will unpack each set of sources, grep for
> > HDIO_GET_IDENTITY, and report any hits?
> >
> > Should this be added to lintian?
> >
> > - Jim Van Zandt
> >
> > p.s. hdparm apparently has this bug.
>
> The BIG question for me is: Should be move the libc6 kernel headers to the
> 2.0.34/35 kernel?
No. As you say...
> I have two problems with doin this now. It is very close to the release,
> and I would hate to "break" major parts of the system if there is a down
> side to moving to the new headers.
We are delivering a 2.0.34 kernel. We're going to have to bite the bullet
with this one and fix it in Slink. I'd like to know the results of the
source grep for HDIO_GET_IDENTITY, though. I can't see that call being
very common.
> Brian, what do you think about this. Are we delivering 2.0.34 and 2.0.35
> kernels? If we are, the current situation will result in several broken
> packages. If we aren't it can wait til slink. It looks like we can loose
> either way. The current situation has "known" problems, while the repaired
> situation would have "unknown" ones.
Plus we'd there would be a number of package recompiles, then possibly
recompiles of those packages that depend on them, plus the other archs
would need to recompile... That could take weeks on its own, not even
counting the time needed to fix any bugs that crop in.
Brian
( bcwhite@verisim.com )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No man dies except he who has not lived.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: