From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Jan 22 13:39:55 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from pcnet1.pcnet.com (pcnet1.pcnet.com [204.213.232.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2090437B405 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2002 13:39:48 -0800 (PST) Received: (from eischen@localhost) by pcnet1.pcnet.com (8.12.1/8.12.1) id g0MLceZk014017; Tue, 22 Jan 2002 16:38:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 16:38:40 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen To: Kenneth W Cochran Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Kernel option USER_LDT issues in -stable In-Reply-To: <200201222110.QAA9516725@shell.TheWorld.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Kenneth W Cochran wrote: > Hello, > > Are there any issues (security, reliablity, performance, etc.) > with regard to the USER_LDT kernel option in -stable? Since > this appears to be defined by default in -current, why is this > not the case with -stable? I can see it being required in -current soon as threadsNG is going to need it. I don't see the harm in making it default in -stable, but I can't address any security concerns (if there are any). -- Dan Eischen To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message