From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757346AbXD0Vfv (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:35:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757351AbXD0Vft (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:35:49 -0400 Received: from mail.tmr.com ([64.65.253.246]:48774 "EHLO gaimboi.tmr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757346AbXD0Ve4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:34:56 -0400 Message-ID: <46326CDD.9040502@tmr.com> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:36:29 -0400 From: Bill Davidsen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061105 SeaMonkey/1.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen.Clark@seclark.us CC: Jeff Garzik , linux-kernel Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.21 References: <20070426040806.GJ3468@stusta.de> <4630E00B.3090502@tmr.com> <4630E9C8.5060000@garzik.org> <4630FA27.1090203@seclark.us> In-Reply-To: <4630FA27.1090203@seclark.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Stephen Clark wrote: > If hardware worked in the previous version of the kernel can't users expect > the same hardware to work in this kernel? > Failure of that assumption is the heart of the whole "regression" discussion. It's not limited to hardware, kernel security might be an issue, some network protocols might work faster and less reliably, etc. Kernel behavior changes sometimes totally break user software which makes unwarranted assumptions. That's not a regression, although users may see it that way. When a change in fork() changed the child-runs-first behavior, many programs broke, as was true with threading changes. Bad reliability is the reward for bad code, but if a kernel change makes that obvious some people think it's a regression. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot