From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
akpm@osdl.org, Steven.Hand@cl.cam.ac.uk,
Christian.Limpach@cl.cam.ac.uk, Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk
Subject: Re: arch/xen is a bad idea
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:09:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1103155782.3585.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041215044927.GF27225@wotan.suse.de>
On Mer, 2004-12-15 at 04:49, Andi Kleen wrote:
> I think that's definitely the wrong way. Also in Linux
> the standard strategy is to first clean up and restructure/refactor
> code and then merge, not the other way round.
Must be two different Linux OS's out there then. I thought it was
- get interfaces right
- get working
- get correct
- merge
- evolve
If we did it as you describe we'd still not have a SATA layer merged for
example.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-12-16 1:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <41BF1983.mailP9C1B91GB@suse.de.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2004-12-14 18:59 ` arch/xen is a bad idea Andi Kleen
2004-12-14 19:35 ` Antonio Vargas
2004-12-14 22:40 ` Ian Pratt
2004-12-15 4:49 ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-16 0:09 ` Alan Cox [this message]
2004-12-16 4:01 ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-16 12:54 ` Alan Cox
2004-12-16 14:09 ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-16 13:19 ` Alan Cox
2004-12-16 14:28 ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-16 20:37 ` Ian Pratt
2004-12-16 18:26 ` Andrew Morton
2004-12-16 18:57 ` Alan Cox
2004-12-16 21:00 ` Ian Pratt
2004-12-16 21:03 ` Andrew Morton
2004-12-16 21:36 ` Ian Pratt
2004-12-16 21:39 ` Rik van Riel
2004-12-17 6:04 ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-17 8:26 ` Ian Pratt
2004-12-16 22:04 ` Philip R Auld
2004-12-16 23:08 ` Rik van Riel
2004-12-17 2:07 ` Philip R Auld
2004-12-17 6:03 ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-15 11:49 ` Pavel Machek
2004-12-16 1:14 ` Ian Pratt
2004-12-16 1:26 ` Pavel Machek
2004-12-16 14:21 ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-16 22:45 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-12-16 23:09 ` Rik van Riel
2004-12-20 15:08 ` arch/xen clue? Dorn Hetzel
2004-12-20 15:15 ` Ian Pratt
2004-12-20 15:23 ` Anton Altaparmakov
2004-12-20 15:34 ` Måns Rullgård
2004-12-15 11:51 ` arch/xen is a bad idea Pavel Machek
2004-12-17 16:05 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-12-18 17:57 ` Ian Pratt
2005-02-25 11:43 ` Andrew Morton
2005-02-25 11:55 ` kernel 2.6.8-24.11-smp errors Marcel Smeets
2005-02-25 12:07 arch/xen is a bad idea Ian Pratt
2005-02-25 15:01 ` Andi Kleen
2005-02-25 22:37 ` Andrew Morton
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-02-26 20:41 Ian Pratt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1103155782.3585.29.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=Christian.Limpach@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=Ian.Pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=Steven.Hand@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.