[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.3.51 tulip broken

> For those not interested what superficially appears to be a kernel power
> grab, there are issue underlying all of what appears to be a personal
> conflict.
> 1) Should the kernel source code interfaces, for well-understood
> interfaces, be stable? (We are solidly committed not having a binary
> interface, so bringing that up is a red herring.)
> 2a) Given that development kernels are frequently unstable in some
> unexpected way, is is reasonable force testing of driver changes
> combined with unknown other changes?

I think so. Anyways, it worked with usb, and it seems to be the only
way to stay in sync with kernel development.

> 2b) Given that the kernel continues to exponentially increasing in size,
> should all development go through the latest development kernel?

Is that really a problem? (My kernel _still_ compiles in 10
minutes. Granted, it used to compile in ten minutes on p/233, now it
is ten minutes on celeron/300 :-)))
I'm "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents me at

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.108 / U:2.672 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site