Kernel security update would break ABI

[Daniel Miller]

I'm for bumping the version number, only after getting the word out by
all means  possible, as to the effects of doing such.  Having
unloadable user modules modules is a much better option than having a
system comprosmised, in my opinion.

Kind Regards,
Daniel Miller


On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 11:30:30 +0100, Martin Pitt <martin at piware.de> wrote:
> Hi folks!
> 
> We currently have a dilemma regarding a Warty security update of the
> kernel.
> 
> There is a public vulnerability which affects the Warty kernel. We
> have a patch and could upload it any time, but this patch changes the
> ABI (Application Binary Interface). This should actually be
> unacceptable for a security update, but it is required to close the
> hole.
> 
> An ABI change has the following consequences:
> 
>  - This would render d-i unbuildable on a security-patched Warty.
>    However, according to Colin we can neglect that.
> 
>  - It breaks compatibility with user-installed modules, which is the
>    actual headache.
> 
> There are two possibilities of handling the module issue:
> 
>  1. Ignore the ABI change and hope that most of the user installed
>     modules continue to work (but if they don't, this could cause a
>     mess).
> 
>  2. Bump the version number, which renders all user-added modules
>     unloadable. They have to be recompiled against the new kernel to
>     work again.
> 
> Any thoughts and/or preferences?
> 
> Thanks and have a nice day,
> 
> Martin
> 
> --
> Martin Pitt                       http://www.piware.de
> Ubuntu Developer            http://www.ubuntulinux.org
> Debian GNU/Linux Developer       http://www.debian.org
> 
> 
> --
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
> 
> 
> 
>