![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 22:21:32 +0000, Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: >On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:03:39PM +1100, Grant Coady wrote: >> By stable I mean rate of change of codebase, patch volume per month, >> 2.6 is orders of magnitude less stable than 2.4 by that simple measure. > >That is no measure of stability. You're welcome to your opinion. >If, say, I merge a large patch in order to support ARM SMP and Linus >takes that, let's say for the sake of argument that's a 10MB diff. >It doesn't touch anything other than files which are solely built or >used for the ARM architecture. So what? You're not one of the people here beholden to pushing a distro's agenda for mainstream x86 windoze wannabe desktops. >So, by your very comment above, if all the updates to non-x86 >architectures were prevented from happening in mainline, you'd have >a much more stable kernel. Not at all, you choose whatever interpretation suits your world view. >(Please do _not_ cc or reply directly to me in this thread - I'll >read replies from the mailing list, thanks.) Get real Grant. - 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: 2006-03-15 01:52 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||