lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: RFC: Starting a stable kernel series off the 2.6 kernel
    On Sat, 03 Dec 2005, Lee Revell wrote:

    > On Sat, 2005-12-03 at 23:27 +0100, Matthias Andree wrote:
    > > A kernel that calls itself stable CAN NOT remove
    > > features unless they had been critically broken from the beginning.
    >
    > So in your opinion we can't add support for new hardware to a stable
    > kernel either because there's a chance of breaking something that worked
    > before, which brings us right back to "stable" meaning "no progress
    > allowed", which begs the question of why you want to upgrade at all.

    Perhaps I did not word not clearly enough, please bear with me as I'm
    not a native speaker.

    There's a gray area between these two extremes. I don't mind if new
    drivers are added, not even if they touch other parts of the code if
    these changes are thoroughly (and I mean thoroughly, not a smoke test of
    the "works for me" kind) examined.

    If devfs had been marked "DEPRECATED, WILL BE REMOVED FROM 2.6.0", all
    would have been fine. (I don't recall the exact version, 2.6.12? It
    wasn't known beforehand), I certainly do not expect new drivers that are
    added to support it.

    First step, make a note "this driver has been added in Linux 2.6.14" so
    that everyone is aware the driver doesn't need to support devfs as that
    one was already deprecated then the driver moved in. Even better, mark
    which deprecated subsystems are unsupported by the driver.

    Second, schedule for removal such subsystems well ahead of time, for
    instance, "DEPRECATED, WILL BE REMOVED JUST BEFORE 2.8.0", and only use
    minor releases to that extent.

    The point is, removing something that has worked well enough that some
    people had a reason to use it, is not "stable".

    Third, IF udev is so sexy but OTOH a real kernel-space devfs can be done
    in 200 LoC as has been claimed so often, why in hell is this not
    happening? Switch "broken bloaty bulky devfs" to "lean & clean devfs"?
    This ship would have been flying the "clean-up nation" flags.

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

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-12-03 23:52    [W:0.034 / U:1.120 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site