Talk:Kernel.org

2011 intrusion
The (old) kernel.org website stated, concerning the intrusion from 2011: "We will be writing up a report on the incident in the future." But the new kernel.org website doesn't seem to mention anything about that, and there doesn't seem to be any up-to-date information or detailed intrusion report available. Is there any (final) report about what exactly happened during the 2011 intrusion of kernel.org? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.121.225 (talk) 21:19, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Template for citations
How about a Template for citations into the source code of the Linux kernel, e.g.
 * https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tree/net/sched/sch_hfsc.c

We have a couple of articles regarding the Linux kernel and components of it, for sheer proof for the existence, reference to the license and reference to inclusion/exclusion into mainline, it would be handy to have an easy-to-use template. ScotXW (talk) 17:23, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Contradiction
Article starts with "kernel.org is a main repository..." then later states "kernel.org is not the primary repository". 66.26.65.118 (talk) 21:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello! Great catch, went ahead and  the article a bit. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 06:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hackers and hacks
I would like to propose changing the words hacker(s) and hack(s) present in this article to other words such as "cracker(s)" or "intruder(s)" and "attack(s)", since the way they are used don't match the definitions and distinctions noted in other articles. Should not an article about the "headquarters" of the biggest free software community hacker project distinguish more clearly the difference between hackers and crackers? Or at least go along many other articles, where the difference is already well explained and documented. Maybe elsewhere it wouldn't make any difference, or it would even introduce confusion. But I believe it will add consistency to the article. In the case of "hackers", I will change it following the Cite note 7, which uses the word "intruders". Waiting for consensus to change "hacks".Burgom (talk) 09:00, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello!  looks totally reasonable to me, together with the explanation provided above.  Went ahead and  further, which should round it up. &mdash; Dsimic (talk &#124; contribs) 13:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kernel.org. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111029105944/http://www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/blogs/browse/2011/08/cracking-kernelorg to http://www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/blogs/browse/2011/08/cracking-kernelorg
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Kernelorg-hacked/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:26, 4 May 2017 (UTC)