lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: 2.3.51 tulip broken
    Hi!

    > 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 :-)))
    Pavel
    --
    I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
    Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents me at discuss@linmodems.org

    -
    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 13:57    [W:0.021 / U:61.752 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site