On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 07:01:20PM -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote: > At 2005-02-21T09:58:45-0800, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 08:09:08AM +0100, Johan Swensson wrote: > > > I would like to suggest that you add > > > https://sourceforge.net/projects/sbs-linux/ to genpatches. It would > > > be nice. And the code SEEMS pretty stable. Atleast for my laptop :) > > > > <stock answer when people ask for new patches to be added to the > > gentoo kernel> No. Get the authors to submit the patch to upstream, > > and then it will show up in the Gentoo kernel, as well as all other > > kernels. </stock> > > > > If you submit a bug, it will get marked with the same response... > > So what about patches that the kernel maintainers have specifically > decided to exclude, such as the TARPIT target for iptables? This handy > module is implemented as part of the iptables Patch-O-Matics. Some of > the POMs are a bit unstable, but this one is kept out of the main kernel > tree for political reasons. Some purists consider it to be "protocol > abuse".
And, because of that, I will always defer to the upstream kernel maintainers, like I would hope that you also would. Are you willing to put the time and effort in to maintain, forward port, and handle all possible bug reports in the kernel area that is touched by this patch? I didn't think so :) > I have specific interest in the TARPIT patch, but in a more general > sense, it's just an example of the many fine patches available for the > kernel. It really seems quite un-Gentoo-ish (whatever that means) to so > blanketly dismiss them. Not at all, this is the gentoo kernel philosophy. I think we even have a web site that specifies this somewhere... thanks, greg k-h -- [email protected] mailing list
