I wrote: >> For example, when I recently added security fixes to linux-libre, I needed >> to add the patches in two separate places, and every time I update the >> version, I need to update two places as well.
David Craven <[email protected]> responded: > I believe this was on purpose to avoid having to rebuild two kernels > every time. My understanding is that most stable kernel updates contain security fixes. In any case, upstream has a deliberate policy of refusing to specify which updates are security-critical, so we must assume that they all are. I'm not comfortable leaving non-Intel kernels with unpatched security flaws. > I was impatient to get this stuff into master because my linux libre > arm kernel wasn't building on the beagle bone black (not enough RAM). > I think some more patience could have made things better =P Yes, of course, that makes sense. I very much appreciate your work on this. Thanks, Mark
