lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: starting with 2.7
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 01:42:11PM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>
> This is not optimism. This is experience. Every ``stable'' kernel I've
> seen is a pile of incredibly stale code where vi'ing any file in it
> instantly reveals numerous months or years old bugs fixed upstream.
> What is gained in terms of reducing the risk of regressions is more
> than lost by the loss of critical examination and by a long longshot.

The main advantage with stable kernels in the good old days (tm) when 4
and 6 were even numbers was that you knew if something didn't work, and
upgrading to a new kernel inside this stable kernel series had a
relatively low risk of new breakages. This meant one big migration every
few years and relatively easy upgrades between stable series kernels.

Nowadays in 2.6, every new 2.6 kernel has several regressions compared
to the previous one, and additionally obsolete but used code like
ipchains and devfs is scheduled for removal making upgrades even harder
for many users.

There's the point that most users should use distribution kernels, but
consider e.g. that there are poor souls with new hardware not supported
by the 3 years old 2.4.18 kernel in the stable part of your Debian
distribution.

> -- wli

cu
Adrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
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: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:1.151 / U:0.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site