lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: 2.2.x instabilities

    Hi,

    IMO, Kernel 2.03x has been worked on long so that it is stable. that's why
    the
    minor version become 3x......But 2.2 just release, now is 9. I think it may not
    as
    stable as 2.0. :p

    Regards,

    Hilary


    rewt wrote:

    > why dont you switch back to 2.0.X? and wait for the 2.2.X to stablize.
    >
    > On Fri, 4 Jun 1999, ron flory wrote:
    >
    > > hi-
    > >
    > > I am writing to ask (beg) that work continue on stabilizing 2.2.x
    > > series kernels before diverting valuable resources to 2.3.x. Traffic
    > > on this list is an indication that we still have some work to do.
    > >
    > > In comparison to the 2.0.3x series, 2.2.x is not quite ready for
    > > production use. I have several systems that have been running under
    > > 2.0.3x continuously for nearly a year, whereas I'm lucky to get a week
    > > on any 2.2.x system (and I have many).
    > >
    > > I'm not calling anybody names, or placing blame, but we need to do
    > > better if we want the Linux movement to continue in such a positive
    > > direction. Remember, NT 5.0 is still bubbling in the redmond kitchens,
    > > and they are going to come out fighting. Admittedly its not our only
    > > concern, but MS plays dirty.....
    > >
    > > 2.2.x still has problems with:
    > >
    > > * NFS. old user-space NFS still works, kernel-space is hosed major.
    > > There are problems with timeouts, crashes, stale handles, error
    > > messages, code warnings.......
    > >
    > > * swap issues.
    > >
    > > * networking instabilities.
    > >
    > > * NCP (novell) clients are iffy. I can break it in minutes.
    > >
    > > * SMP is still 'delicate'.
    > >
    > > * SMP/Alpha threads/mutexes are unstable.
    > >
    > > * kernel sources often generate errors/warnings. We can do a LOT
    > > better here.
    > >
    > > * kernel crashes/oops's. I NEVER got one of these with 2.0.x kernels.
    > >
    > > These are all issues that MS can play upon. Most of this stuff can be
    > > caught with better testing practices in a short time. I feel this
    > > should be done before chasing after the shiny new 2.3.x rainbow.
    > >
    > > In spite of all I've said here, I still feel that Linux is far superior
    > > to anything else out there, and I'll continue to use, promote, and
    > > develop it for the foreseeable future...
    > >
    > > ron
    > >
    > > -
    > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
    > >
    >
    > -
    > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.024 / U:0.068 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site