[cgl_tech_board] Re: [cgl_discussion] Re: [cgl_specs] Use case -
rf at suse.de
Wed Mar 30 01:47:41 PST 2005
I want to see the use case being crisp and clear limited to patching
apps that are not part of the OS. The current wording would allow
live patching of kernel or glibc and this is not acceptable.
We don't want a troyan horse in our distro.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 12:02:53AM -0700, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Takashi Ikebe wrote:
> > Brian,
> > Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
> > > Takashi,
> > >
> > > How did live-patching specialized applications turn into live-patching
> > > glibc? Or, the kernel for that matter?
> > Do you mean what is the condition of live patching?
> What I meant to ask was what bearing your remarks with regard to glibc
> and gdb had on live-patching if the purpose of live patching is to patch
> specialized applications only.
> What is the scope of live patching? Specialized applications? General
> purpose fundamental libraries (glibc), the operating system in general
> Brian F. G. Bidulock ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
> bidulock at openss7.org ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in ¦
> http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying to adapt the world to himself. ¦
> ¦ Therefore all progress depends on the ¦
> ¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦
More information about the cgl_discussion