Old article, outdated information
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| caitlyn Sep 01, 2009 2:48 PM EDT |
First the article is a couple of weeks old. Second, the claim that no distribution (except maybe Mandriva) has issued new, patched kernels is false by now. VectorLinux had one out shortly after this article came out, for example. Lots of distros have patched this. My point is why post this outdated article now? It generates FUD not because the content was wrong but because it appears it is current when it is not. |
| jdixon Sep 01, 2009 3:43 PM EDT |
> My point is why post this outdated article now? Because it's the publicly available version, which (as you noted) is now almost two weeks old. The latest version isn't available to non-subscribers. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 01, 2009 3:44 PM EDT |
Quoting:Why post this outdated article now? Because it's from LWN. It contains a wealth of technical information and explanation missing from other articles. Also, because it's from LWN we could not post it earlier. LWN articles only become publicly available after a few weeks. |
| Scott_Ruecker Sep 01, 2009 7:32 PM EDT |
Exactly Sander, I caught hell for posting them before they were supposed to be publicly available so I quit doing it. I wait until the are publicly available before posting them to our newswire, which means they are a minimum of two weeks old at that point. |
| tracyanne Sep 02, 2009 12:01 AM EDT |
Then don't post them. If the best we can do is post outdated material from LWN, and they don't like it when we post current material. Don't post any material. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 02, 2009 1:03 AM EDT |
@TracyAnne: I don't know about you, but I love the high technical level of LWN articles. They always contain deep technical know-how and background that other articles simply don't have. There's no way that InfoWeek or some other IT news site is going to explain how the null pointer dereference works, why userspace programs can map memory to the low address space and how SE Linux fits in that picture. That's the reason I post such articles. |
| tracyanne Sep 02, 2009 1:22 AM EDT |
then I guess we put up with outdated articles. |
| gus3 Sep 02, 2009 1:37 AM EDT |
Methinks there be a confusion of "outdated" and "irrelevant". The case study of this particular bug is forever relevant. |
| Scott_Ruecker Sep 02, 2009 2:03 AM EDT |
That link is for only publicly available links as of now. I do not see that changing anytime soon. |
| r_a_trip Sep 02, 2009 7:28 AM EDT |
Simple solution, put a warning label on LWN material. Something like "LWN Archive Article". |
| tuxchick Sep 02, 2009 9:40 AM EDT |
Good god, what's with all the whining? Waaahh waahh waahh, an article on LXer that was not perfectly pleasing and delightful in every way!! NOOOOOO!!! Lynch the editors!! |
| caitlyn Sep 02, 2009 10:03 AM EDT |
tuxchick: It's not whining. The information is sufficiently out of date to give a false impression about the state of the Linux kernel. It gives the idea that there are serious unsolved problems. It just isn't true at this point. |
| gus3 Sep 02, 2009 11:23 AM EDT |
Quoting:It gives the idea that there are serious unsolved problems.Being careful with pointers in C is an ongoing battle. The Linux kernel is no exception, as shown by two major bugs of this type in less than a month. As new devices require new drivers, and new developers hone their craft, the vigilance against uninitialized pointers must become habit. Just because these two bugs are resolved in the mainline, doesn't mean there are no more, nor that there will never again be another unresolved pointer in the Linux kernel. This article should be a standard hand-out on Day 1 of pointer discussion. Like I said, outdated (w.r.t. the current mainline Linux kernel), but forever relevant. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!