[lkml]   [1997]   [Nov]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectLinux Stability & cold.system
    Hi, I read cold.system a lot, and we've recently finished a minor flame
    war about some really worthless stuff. It wasn't even "should there
    have been a 2.0.30", but merely people insulting the developers when the
    "upgrade" to 2.0.30 didn't work as good as 2.0.29. This was mainly
    because they didn't understand how Linux development works, but also
    because they they that the "stable" releases were somehow guaranteed to
    be stable.
    How do YOU check on the stability of a release? I read the
    linux-kernel archives, and I used to (and hopefully will again) look at
    the unnofficial patch list on linuxhq. However, lots of newbies don't
    know that.
    So, some people (myself included) have put forth some ideas on some way
    of actually MEASURING the stability of kernels. One of my favorite was
    one somebody else mentioned: have a utility kind of like the 'make
    check' things that come with bash that tests the kernel currently
    running for stability, memory leaks, etc. I know people have
    "kernel-killers" out there :) If some standard test suite were
    available, then everyone could upload their results. However, although
    we can test much of the kernel pretty well, we might have some
    difficulty testing wierd components. I suppose we could try to get each
    developer to write a stress-tester for his/her subsystem.
    Has anyone (LMP perhaps?) started this already? Will this work?
    Thanks for the info.


     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.019 / U:0.068 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site