From: "Matt D. Robinson" <yakker@alacritech.com>
To: Werner Almesberger <Werner.Almesberger@epfl.ch>
Cc: Linux Kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
yakker@alacritech.com
Subject: Re: Linux stifles innovation...
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:54:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A8DCBE2.7A5D311@alacritech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0102161843490.2548-100000@asdf.capslock.lan> <3A8DC2A7.43C7A5C3@alacritech.com> <20010217013422.A3055@almesberger.net>
Werner Almesberger wrote:
>
> Matt D. Robinson wrote:
> > My feeling is we should splinter the kernel development for
> > different purposes (enterprise, UP, security, etc.). I'm sure
> > it isn't a popular view, but I feel it would allow faster progression
> > of kernel functionality and features in the long run.
>
> "enterprise" XOR security ? I think you understand the problem with
> your approach well ;-)
Actually I do. Perhaps I should define enterprise as "big iron". In
that way, enterprise kernels would be far more innovative than a
secure kernel (which cares less about performance gains and large
features and more about just being "secure"). Unless you meant
something else and I'm misinterpreting what you've stated. :)
> Linux scales well from PDAs to large clusters. This is quite an
> achievement. Other operating systems are not able to match this.
> So why do you think that Linux should try to mimic their flaws ?
> Out of pity ?
I always considered SGI's kernels, from the low-end system up to
the large server configurations, to scale well. Certainly it didn't
work on PDAs. :) If you consider it a flaw for vendors to be able
to create their own Linux kernels based on optimizations
for their hardware and their customers, then that's a horrible
perspective on overall open source progression. In fact, I think
if some of these vendors created their own kernel trees, it would
inevitably lead to inclusion of the best features into the primary
kernel tree. Where's the harm in that?
> BTW, parallel development does happen all the time. The point of
> convergence in a single "mainstream" kernel is that you benefit
> from all the work that's been going on while you did the stuff
> you care most about.
Agreed. It's great to have a "primary" kernel. I'd like to see
more splintered kernels (not smaller project efforts), that's all.
And I don't think that convergence happens quickly or efficiently
enough, despite all the great work Linus and Alan do.
> - Werner (having pity with the hungry looking trolls)
--Matt
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-02-17 0:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 170+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-02-15 17:49 Linux stifles innovation fsnchzjr
2001-02-15 17:55 ` Stephen Frost
2001-02-15 18:04 ` Mark Haney
2001-02-15 19:49 ` David D.W. Downey
2001-02-15 20:20 ` Alan Olsen
2001-02-15 20:42 ` dave
2001-02-15 21:17 ` Richard B. Johnson
2001-02-15 20:43 ` [OTP] " David D.W. Downey
2001-02-15 22:31 ` Bill Wendling
2001-02-15 22:37 ` William T Wilson
2001-02-16 12:45 ` Rik van Riel
2001-02-16 15:10 ` James Sutherland
2001-02-16 16:02 ` Mark Haney
2001-02-16 16:26 ` David Woodhouse
2001-02-16 16:30 ` Mark Haney
2001-02-16 19:23 ` David D.W. Downey
2001-02-16 20:18 ` James Sutherland
2001-02-17 0:03 ` Carlos Fernandez Sanz
2001-02-17 0:35 ` Dan Hollis
2001-02-17 0:41 ` Michael H. Warfield
2001-02-17 1:52 ` Dan Hollis
2001-02-17 2:20 ` XOR [ was: Linux stifles innovation... ] David Relson
2001-02-17 2:32 ` Dan Hollis
2001-02-17 8:16 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-02-17 13:16 ` David Relson
2001-02-17 18:12 ` brian
2001-02-18 2:01 ` Dan Hollis
2001-02-17 9:08 ` Linux stifles innovation James Sutherland
2001-02-17 12:45 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-17 9:05 ` James Sutherland
2001-02-17 0:04 ` LA Walsh
2001-02-16 9:26 ` Helge Hafting
2001-02-16 9:36 ` James Sutherland
2001-02-16 12:44 ` Helge Hafting
2001-02-16 17:40 ` Joseph Pingenot
2001-02-16 14:25 ` Andrew Scott
2001-02-16 19:48 ` Jesse Pollard
2001-02-16 22:27 ` Dennis
2001-02-16 22:20 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-17 12:37 ` [LONG RANT] " Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-17 13:37 ` Russell King
2001-02-17 19:15 ` Henning P . Schmiedehausen
2001-02-17 22:03 ` Felix von Leitner
2001-02-18 11:54 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-18 12:26 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-18 13:43 ` Russell King
2001-02-18 9:27 ` Russell King
2001-02-17 19:20 ` Jacob Luna Lundberg
2001-02-18 1:06 ` Peter Samuelson
2001-02-18 4:15 ` Ben Ford
2001-02-17 18:48 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-02-19 9:24 ` Helge Hafting
2001-02-19 10:53 ` Werner Almesberger
2001-02-19 11:07 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-19 11:28 ` Nicholas Knight
2001-02-19 11:36 ` David Lang
2001-02-19 12:53 ` Nicholas Knight
2001-02-19 11:47 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-19 12:57 ` Nicholas Knight
2001-02-19 12:00 ` Werner Almesberger
2001-02-19 12:15 ` Henning P . Schmiedehausen
2001-02-19 16:04 ` Paul Jakma
2001-02-19 16:07 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-19 14:15 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-02-20 23:39 ` Brian May
2001-02-19 11:59 ` Henning P . Schmiedehausen
2001-02-19 13:11 ` Werner Almesberger
2001-02-19 14:07 ` David Howells
2001-02-19 14:55 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-19 15:53 ` Mikulas Patocka
2001-02-19 16:26 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-19 19:11 ` The lack of specification (was Re: [LONG RANT] Re: Linux stifles innovation... ) Mikulas Patocka
2001-02-19 20:02 ` Eric W. Biederman
2001-02-19 20:17 ` Albert D. Cahalan
2001-02-19 21:18 ` Mikulas Patocka
2001-02-19 21:34 ` The lack of specification Russell King
2001-02-19 21:47 ` Eli Carter
2001-02-19 15:58 ` [LONG RANT] Re: Linux stifles innovation Richard B. Johnson
2001-02-19 16:14 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-19 16:26 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-19 21:57 ` Keith Owens
2001-02-19 19:27 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-02-17 16:54 ` Francois Romieu
2001-02-16 22:31 ` Dan Hollis
2001-02-16 22:51 ` David D.W. Downey
2001-02-16 22:59 ` Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.] John Cavan
2001-02-16 23:07 ` Linux stifles innovation Mike A. Harris
2001-02-16 23:45 ` Matt D. Robinson
2001-02-16 23:46 ` Mike A. Harris
2001-02-17 0:15 ` Matt D. Robinson
2001-02-17 0:34 ` Werner Almesberger
2001-02-17 0:54 ` Matt D. Robinson [this message]
2001-02-17 1:58 ` Werner Almesberger
2001-02-17 12:41 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-17 17:51 ` Robert Read
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.3.96.1010217145415.31128A-100000@orion.hq.dalalu.fr>
2001-02-17 18:40 ` Henning P . Schmiedehausen
2001-02-16 23:33 ` Hristo Doichev
2001-02-17 0:01 ` Alan Olsen
2001-02-17 0:10 ` rjd
2001-02-17 1:34 ` Neal Dias
2001-02-17 2:05 ` Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-17 12:46 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-17 13:13 ` Roeland Th. Jansen
2001-02-21 23:00 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
2001-02-21 23:17 ` Augustin Vidovic
2001-02-22 1:08 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
2001-02-22 0:09 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-02-22 0:21 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-23 12:14 ` Wakko Warner
2001-02-23 12:31 ` David Weinehall
2001-02-27 8:48 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2001-02-17 7:20 ` Mike Pontillo
2001-02-17 16:11 ` [OT]Re: " Gregory Maxwell
2001-02-17 7:39 ` Vesselin Atanasov
2001-02-17 19:08 ` Dennis
2001-02-17 19:08 ` Mohammad A. Haque
2001-02-17 20:47 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-24 21:11 ` Dennis
2001-02-24 21:06 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-17 19:11 ` Dennis
2001-02-17 19:36 ` Francois Romieu
2001-02-17 20:48 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-17 19:24 ` Dennis
2001-02-17 19:38 ` Dennis
2001-02-17 20:01 ` Michael Bacarella
2001-02-17 20:11 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-02-17 19:56 ` Linux stifles innovation... [way O.T.] Dennis
2001-02-17 20:28 ` Michael H. Warfield
2001-02-18 11:25 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-18 15:32 ` John Cavan
2001-02-18 0:13 ` Gerhard Mack
2001-02-17 20:05 ` Linux stifles innovation Dennis
2001-02-17 20:05 ` James A. Sutherland
2001-02-17 20:14 ` Michael H. Warfield
2001-02-18 10:57 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-17 20:28 ` Alan Olsen
2001-02-21 23:48 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
2001-02-17 22:07 ` Felix von Leitner
2001-02-17 20:08 ` Dennis
2001-02-17 20:22 ` Michael H. Warfield
2001-02-17 20:41 ` Gregory Maxwell
2001-02-18 10:59 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-18 21:02 ` Bob Taylor
2001-02-17 22:38 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-02-17 23:07 ` Michael H. Warfield
2001-02-18 15:20 ` Stefan Smietanowski
2001-02-18 0:51 ` Peter Samuelson
2001-02-16 17:25 ` Byron Albert
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-02-16 17:21 Wayne.Brown
2001-02-18 2:10 Torrey Hoffman
2001-02-18 3:55 Torrey Hoffman
2001-02-18 5:15 ` Ben Ford
2001-02-18 11:17 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-18 16:42 ` Michael H. Warfield
2001-02-18 18:00 ` Gregory S. Youngblood
2001-02-18 18:04 ` Michael H. Warfield
2001-02-19 1:36 ` Gregory S. Youngblood
2001-02-18 18:21 ` Peter Svensson
2001-02-18 23:14 ` Jonathan Morton
2001-02-18 11:16 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2001-02-18 12:19 ` Francis Galiegue
2001-02-18 17:50 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-02-18 18:13 ` Henning P . Schmiedehausen
2001-02-18 22:15 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-02-18 22:25 ` Steve VanDevender
2001-02-18 22:31 ` Andre Hedrick
2001-02-18 11:46 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-22 0:11 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
2001-02-22 1:39 Leif Sawyer
2001-02-22 1:44 ` Dr. Kelsey Hudson
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=3A8DCBE2.7A5D311@alacritech.com \
--to=yakker@alacritech.com \
--cc=Werner.Almesberger@epfl.ch \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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