On Sun, 2003-03-23 at 15:30, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> I don't agree that's always been true by any means. It may currently
> be true, but that's far from a good thing. The current state of divergance
> the distros have from mainline 2.4 is IMHO the biggest problem Linux has
> today.
What part of my statement are you disagreeing with, here?
I agree distribution divergence is a big issue. It may be a mostly
insolvable one, too. It is partially a result of having a long
development cycle. But even if we had a shorter development cycle,
different distributions have different priorities. It is a hard
problem.
> The distros inherently have a conflict of interest getting changes merged
> back into mainline ... it's time consuming to do, it provides them no real
> benefit (they have to maintain their huge trees anyway), and it actively
> damages the "value add" they provide.
I do not disagree.
Although, I think there is incentive to get work merged. It _does_
reduce maintenance. I think you can see Red Hat merging stuff back. I
know my employer encourages everything I do to be done openly and get it
merged. Its a huge benefit to maintenance and QA to get stuff merged.
> If that's people's attitude ("you should use a vendor"), then we need a
> 2.4-fixed tree to be run by somebody with an interest in providing
> critical bugfixes to the community with no distro ties. People may be
> perfectly capable of finding, applying, and collecting their own patches,
> but that's no reason to make it difficult.
No where above did I say "you should use a vendor"
In fact, what I did say is "I think users can and should compile their
own kernel if they want. And as kernel developers, we should facilitate
that."
I merely suggest that users should not expect anything if they go it
there own. They need to follow the lists and be informed. Its like me
assuming I can maintain my car without a mechanic and then freaking out
when I did not hear about a service defect. Actually, a better analogy
may include me knowing nothing about cars, too :)
Marcelo is in a tough spot. I think Arjan's email (just sent) sums it
up well. It is not so clear cut. Personally, I think the ext3 bugs in
2.4.20 are worse than this local ptrace problem (there are other local
issues, too). I also think some people are skeptical over the
correctness of this patch.
Anyhow, what exactly are we arguing over?
Robert Love
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 23 2003 - 22:00:45 EST