X-Original-To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org Received: from yavin4.bsod.eu (yavin4.bsod.eu [188.164.131.106]) by lists.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D8CA5C4680 for ; Sun, 2 Apr 2017 19:54:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from yavin4.bsod.eu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yavin4.bsod.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49FC1F09C; Sun, 2 Apr 2017 19:54:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from yavin4.bsod.eu (unknown [192.168.1.3]) by yavin4.bsod.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E5DEF09A; Sun, 2 Apr 2017 19:54:39 +0000 (GMT) X-Mailinglist: alpine-devel Precedence: list List-Id: Alpine Development List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2017 21:54:39 +0200 From: Francesco Colista To: William Pitcock Cc: alpine-dev Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] grsec go or no-go call for 3.6 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6cb1b9fe292e94575683ea97bafe2c61@alpinelinux.org> X-Sender: fcolista@alpinelinux.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.2.3 Il 2017-04-02 00:39 William Pitcock ha scritto: > Hello, > > It is getting to the point to decide whether we wish to continue > including grsec kernel for 3.6. > There are three options that I can see: > > 1. Ship grsec in Alpine 3.6 and see what happens. Revisit this issue > in Alpine 3.7. One of the paradigm of Alpine is "secure". grsec contributed so far in making Alpine "secure". I would not make any important decision based on a "possibility", rahter on official announcements. Therefore, I vote for 1. Thanks William for having brought up this discussion. -- :: Francesco Colista :: Alpine Linux Infrstraucture :: http://www.alpinelinux.org :: GnuPG ID: C4FB9584 --- Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org Help: alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org ---