On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 09:56:02AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote: > > The commit description is : 177-4-ge64fae5 therefore I think it's > reasonnable to claim that all versoins of udev >= 178 are affected. > > Back to my initial question, and assuming it's reasonnable to run an > old kernel with affected udev (>= 178 or maybe earlier), how this > should be fixed ? Do you think it makes sense to backport your initial > fix ?
As no one has reported this problem in the timeframe that 3.4 has been around, I don't want to add it unless people say there is a problem. Given that udev also fixed the issue in newer versions, if someone is wanting to run an older kernel with an updated udev, I would think they would update to a newer version without this issue. But again, if you could test this, that would be great, and we can go from there. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
