I may have been a bit crude, but not hostile at all, and if you felt I was,
I do apologize. I find Linux is the best ever designed OS, but focusing too
much
on some aspects may lead to sever mistakes. I also do big mistakes in softwares
I'm writting (if some of you digged into Pliant code, you know that it's far
from
perfect), so when I have strong opinion (which is not very frequent), I express
it
strongly, and hope it's valuable.
I've been running 2.0.36 and 2.0.37 on production servers for several monthes,
on hardware chosen only among best supported devices, and I never noticed
a failure which did not revealed at a later point to be hardware related
(many thanks to Alan about this).
>From what I red from the kernel mailing list archives, I understood that the
main
concern of Linus is to keep Linux consistent, and he is very clever about that,
but
RAID is something very different because if you don't cope with it, then,
to be fair, you have to count some of the hardware failures as some OS bugs,
because with appropriate software (RAID with hot repair) you could have solved
them without interrupting services.
So what I wanted to express is that if you say the new code is not perfect,
so we don't include it, it has to be balanced with the fact that not including
the code means ignoring hardware failures.
Back to my experiments, hardware failures is the biggest problem with an as
stable kernel as Linux can be, so not coping with RAID means ignoring the
main stability troubles.
-
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/