From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gerrit Hannaert Subject: Re: Status of reiserfs in Redhat 2.4.7-10 kernel ? Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 21:55:51 +0200 Message-ID: <3E9DB547.4030109@web.de> References: <3E9D0744.9090907@namesys.com> <1050499043.10791.137.camel@tiny.suse.com> <3E9D7DA6.8040507@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <3E9D7DA6.8040507@namesys.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Hans Reiser , reiserfs-list@namesys.com Hans Reiser wrote: > Test suites cannot compete with real users. Marcelo gets lots of real > users before he releases a final version, and the distros don't. > However, I would also add that a conservative person would wait until > a few weeks after Marcelo releases, and confirm that it really was > stable according to those on the linux kernel mailing list. I think there is something to be said for test suites *and* for testing by a good number of users, and new kernels should probably get a good dose of both before running on any production system. You should probably get as much testing as you can get, and excluding test suites doesn't sound like a good idea to me - which may not be what Hans meant, though ;-). That said, I would really like the vendors' and 'vanilla' kernels to converge a lot more than they do now... I don't like the idea that some differences in the source trees have more 'historic' motivations than being new features or bugfixes (just a hunch). Personally I've been switching back and forth between vendor and patched 'vanilla' kernels for the last few years... - Gerrit