Re: Debian Kernels was: 2.6.0test9 Reiserfs boot time "buffer layer error at fs/buffer.c:431"

[Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>]

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:27:36 -0500
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:05:09 +0100, Pavel Machek said:
> 
> > Okay, in the perfect world we'd have just one distribution with all
> > packages unmodified. Well.. but we are not there yet.
> 
> Then why do we have a -mm kernel and a -ac kernel and a.....?
> 
> It's interesting that we've apparently decided that Andrew Morton or
> Alan Cox or any of the other -initial kernel streams are allowed to have
> different goals (and thus different code to achieve those goals) but
> we seem to think that distributions are not allowed to do the same thing...

There is quite a simple difference in -XX kernel and a distro-patch. People
have to actively decide to use some patched kernel for whatever their reason
may be. A distro on the other hand floods the average user with patched
versions _without_ the users' active decision.
Please keep in mind that a lot of users are not capable of compiling/installing
a new kernel. Those who are have a free decision, those who are not have simply
no choice.
 
> -exec-shield is OK if it shows up in Andrew's stuff, but not when it's
> in the RedHat from whence it came?  What's wrong with THAT?

s.a.

Regards,
Stephan