[lkml]   [1997]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: "obsolete" hardware
    On Wed, 11 Jun 1997, linux kernel account wrote:

    > > I am more concerned about the current situation with the "can't
    > > get a free page", SMP lockups and the Adaptec timeouts - I'm experiencing
    > > all of the above. I know there are people spending their precious time
    > > fixing this - but I would hate to hear that any of this would wind up
    > > on the backburner because of 386 support. I would be willing to
    > > bet quite a bit of money that there are more AIC7XXX in use out there
    > > than 386s. The same for goes for SMP machines.
    > I think you miss the point.. Linux developers work on what they want to..
    > If there is intrest in fixing that then someone will.. Those who wish to
    > work on 386es will.. If you remove 386 support then they will make their
    > own version of linux or abandon linux all togeather.. It's not like linux
    > is made by some company and Linux says 'You and you work on this and that.
    > Forget about 386es'.. People do what they want.. If you WANT to
    > stop adaptec timeouts then why dont you find some time and contribute to
    > what YOU want and stop trying to tell the rest of us what to do.
    While I agree with what linker has to say here, I also agree with yuri
    that the "free page" problem has gotten to the point that it is keeping
    all the other "shining features", being created by those wonderful
    volunteers, from being appreciated.

    When a simple file system utility like mke2fs can lock up the kernel
    simply because the number of buffers it allocates for the process
    fragments memory to the point that the kernel can't swap processes and
    locks, the problem has gotten to the point that it effects everyone.

    Drivers for SCSI devices are agreed by most to be in a tangled mess that
    needs attention, but I would argue that a kernel that will perform
    "reasonable tasks" has a higher priority.

    My question is, why has this problem been left to fester for as long as it
    has? In fact, the work that has been done on buffer.c and related code
    since 2.0.27 has slowly escallated the problem to the point that 2.0.30
    can not be used to install Linux on some, otherwise reasonable, machines.

    As a lowly user, I lack the skills or the time to attempt a repair of this
    problem. I am forced to throw myself at the mercy of more capable

    Waiting is,

    _-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_-

    aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769
    Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
    e-mail: Tallahassee, FL 32308

    _-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:39    [W:0.027 / U:17.136 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site