From: "Massimo Cetra" <mcetra@navynet.it>
To: "'Ed Tomlinson'" <edt@aei.ca>,
"'Chuck Ebbert'" <76306.1226@compuserve.com>
Cc: "'Bill Davidsen'" <davidsen@tmr.com>,
"'William Lee Irwin III'" <wli@holomorphy.com>,
"'linux-kernel'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: My thoughts on the "new development model"
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:09:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <00c201c4bb4c$56d1b8b0$e60a0a0a@guendalin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200410260644.47307.edt@aei.ca>
> On Tuesday 26 October 2004 01:40, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > Bill Davidsen wrote:
> >
> > > I don't see the need for a development kernel, and it is
> desirable
> > > to be
> > > able to run kernel.org kernels.
> >
> > Problem is, kernel.org 'release' kernels are quite buggy. For
> > example 2.6.9 has a long list of bugs:
> >
> > Sure, the next release will (may?) fix these bugs, but it will
> > definitely add a whole set of new ones.
>
> To my mind this just points out the need for a bug fix
> branch. e.g. a
> branch containing just bug/security fixes against the current
> stable kernel. It might also be worth keeping the branch
> active for the n-1 stable kernel too.
To my mind, we only need to make clear that a stable kernel is a stable
kernel.
Not a kernel for experiments.
To my mind, stock 2.6 kernels are nice for nerds trying patches and
willing to recompile their kernel once a day. They are not suitable for
servers. Several times on testing machines, switching from a 2.6 to the
next one has caused bugs on PCI, acpi, networking and so on.
The direction is lost. How many patchsets for vanilla kernel exist?
Someone has decided that linux must go on desktops as well and
developing new magnificent features for desktop users is causing serious
problems to the ones who use linux at work on production servers.
2.4 tree is still the best solution for production.
2.6 tree is great for gentoo users who like gcc consuming all CPU
(maxumum respect to gentoo but I prefer debian)
Massimo Cetra
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-26 11:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 115+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-26 5:40 My thoughts on the "new development model" Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-26 10:44 ` Ed Tomlinson
2004-10-26 11:09 ` Massimo Cetra [this message]
2004-10-26 12:08 ` Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-26 19:03 ` Mathieu Segaud
2004-10-26 20:16 ` Let's make a small change to the process Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-26 20:22 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 20:26 ` Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-26 20:33 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 20:36 ` Dave Jones
2004-10-26 20:44 ` Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-27 0:51 ` Jan Knutar
2004-10-26 20:48 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-26 21:00 ` Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-26 15:03 ` My thoughts on the "new development model" William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 21:19 ` Ed Tomlinson
2004-10-27 3:05 ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-27 4:29 ` Rik van Riel
2004-10-27 5:13 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-10-27 5:23 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 6:04 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-10-27 6:28 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 6:50 ` Massimo Cetra
2004-10-27 6:56 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-11-16 16:43 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-10-27 13:48 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27 14:57 ` Theodore Ts'o
2004-10-27 15:35 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27 19:46 ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-27 21:08 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27 21:14 ` Rik van Riel
2004-10-27 17:55 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 13:38 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27 5:25 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-28 6:46 ` michael
2004-10-28 7:13 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-28 7:28 ` Hacksaw
2004-10-29 21:30 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-10-28 7:57 ` Massimo Cetra
2004-10-28 16:14 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-28 17:27 ` Theodore Ts'o
2004-10-28 23:19 ` michael
2004-10-29 0:02 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27 4:26 ` Rik van Riel
2004-11-16 16:18 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-10-26 12:37 ` Barry K. Nathan
2004-10-26 14:40 ` Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-26 14:28 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 14:41 ` Gene Heskett
2004-10-26 14:24 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 15:27 ` Alan Cox
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-10-28 23:33 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-28 23:53 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-28 13:04 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-28 13:15 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-10-28 15:03 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-28 15:07 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-28 17:33 ` Alan Cox
2004-10-28 18:39 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-29 13:19 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-10-29 17:49 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 19:50 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-27 21:40 ` Alan Cox
2004-10-28 2:59 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2004-10-28 10:16 ` Alan Cox
2004-10-27 0:00 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-27 0:24 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2004-10-27 0:36 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 0:36 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 2:45 ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-27 3:19 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 2:47 ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-26 16:32 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-26 17:37 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 15:54 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-26 17:50 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-22 20:03 My thoughts on the "new development model"(A bit late tho) Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-22 21:52 ` My thoughts on the "new development model" Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-22 22:12 ` Clemens Schwaighofer
2004-10-23 12:55 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2004-10-24 3:04 ` Clemens Schwaighofer
2004-10-22 22:45 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-22 22:50 ` Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-22 23:21 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-23 0:41 ` Lee Revell
2004-10-22 22:57 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-10-23 0:09 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-23 2:40 ` Lee Revell
2004-10-25 21:15 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-10-25 22:08 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 16:12 ` Charles Shannon Hendrix
2004-10-26 16:53 ` Mark Nipper
2004-10-23 1:40 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-10-23 5:04 ` Greg KH
2004-10-26 1:07 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-10-23 5:52 ` Willy Tarreau
2004-10-23 14:18 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-23 19:58 ` Kronos
2004-10-23 20:05 ` Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-22 22:58 ` Lee Revell
2004-10-22 23:21 ` Paul Fulghum
2004-10-22 23:43 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-23 8:01 ` Boris Bukowski
2004-10-26 16:01 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-26 16:44 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-26 16:58 ` Hua Zhong
2004-10-26 18:53 ` Diego Calleja
2004-10-26 19:33 ` Paul Fulghum
2004-10-27 15:31 ` Alan Cox
2004-10-27 15:30 ` Alan Cox
2004-10-27 18:37 ` Hua Zhong
2004-10-27 21:39 ` Alan Cox
2004-10-27 16:59 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-10-27 19:27 ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-26 18:01 ` Stephen Hemminger
2004-10-26 18:38 ` John Richard Moser
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='00c201c4bb4c$56d1b8b0$e60a0a0a@guendalin' \
--to=mcetra@navynet.it \
--cc=76306.1226@compuserve.com \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=edt@aei.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox