On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'm not going to argue that this shouldn't have been fixed in udev > sooner, nor that it was not a bug in udev, but it was eventually fixed, > as far as I can tell, with commit > ea6039a30929ff845859ed601594546d71894d84 (udev: allow firmware requests > to bypass the dependency tracking), which showed up in udev 195, which > was released October 23, 2012, well after 3.4.0. Oh, goodie. Apparently the patch did make it in eventually, then. Because *my* beef with that whole thing wasn't that it took so long, but about how Kay was in complete denial about udev being broken in the first place. Even after people told him exactly what the bug was, he was blaming others. Apparently he eventually did see the light. But he spent a *long* time blaming others. Lookie here, for example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=827538 where he tries to blame drivers for his own breakage, and talks about how the drivers are buggy. That was in early June. And this was not because Kay didn't know he was responsible. No, look here: http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg185742.html this was in JANUARY, when he saw the first bug reports come in, and HE HIMSELF talked about how it was due to his udev changes. So Kay *knowingly* broke things, and when people complained, he tried to blame the kernel despite clearly knowing that it was his own fault. This went on for *months*. It wasn't ignorance. It was pure and utter incompetence, and unwillingness to admit that he had broken things. And the breakage was mainly for the odd devices, so it took a long time to percolate up to the point where I was aware of it. Because Kay kept closing bugzillas and trying to point people at other things. And it took much much too long for people to actually call him on his bullshit. So you think it's all made fine by the fact that apparently it then got fixed in *October*, after people had complained for over half a year, and *others* had sent him the trivial patches to fix it up, and the kernel had already fixed it because relying on udev maintainers to fix it looked rather unlikely? > And yes, I might have some huge blind spots about udev, it being my > "baby" and all, It's not udev itself. We didn't have these kinds of problems when you maintained it. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html