On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) <klond...@gentoo.org> wrote: > El 15/08/17 a las 17:50, R0b0t1 escribió: >> Where was this decision discussed? > https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-hardened/message/62ebc2e26d91e8f079197c2c83788cff > > And many other threads in that list for example, those are just blueness > (the package maintainer) conclussions. >> The last available kernel is >> apparently receiving long term support, there may not be any reason to >> remove it. > Not by the original upstream, and definitively not in the way in which > Grsec used to (manually cherrypicking security related commits and not > just those marked as security related). >
All blueness says in that is that he can't personally support the patches. That's fine, and nobody that I know of ever expected him to do that. However, until they are unfixably broken, why remove them? Keeping them until a suitable replacement is available seems like the best option available. There's no criteria in that notice for when they would be removed. What criteria was used to decide they are generating useless work and should be removed? > Although minipli's kernel patches are good and I personally recommend > them, this is not something the Gentoo Hardened team will do. Also they > probably should be renamed something else. I'm not sure anyone is asking the hardened team to do anything, except for people on the hardened team who want to remove the patches. >> If it isn't broken and creating work yet I'm not sure why >> anyone cares. > > Go to #gentoo-hardened and see how there is people asking about this > again and again :P > I'm not sure what you mean. There are people asking about it, but that doesn't necessarily mean they want it to happen. If something is done people are going to discuss it regardless of what it is. Please understand, I don't want to keep an old version of the kernel and associated patches around forever, just until a replacement is actually found. R0b0t1.
