On Sat, 27 Apr 2002 15:07:34 -0400
begin Jerry McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed forth:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2002 11:41:52 -0700 Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> ---snipped my original message---
>
> > I think your'e missing the entire point of the unstable tree. Its not
> > there solely for people to play with the assorted new features that
> > get thrown in. And no where is there any promise of stability or
> > usability.
> >
>
> Yes, I've missed something, but why even post a kernel source package
> that doesn't even compile %70? It'd be better to keep it under wraps in
> CVS, at least until the damn thing compiles. :')
The UNSTABLE (x.ODD#.x) kernels are for kernel hackers. Are you a kernel
hacker? Have you noticed the kernel doesn't use CVS?
>
> > A Rolls Royce is akin to the 2.4.x tree, not the 2.5.x tree. There
> > were *alot* of 2.3.x kernels that were completely and utterly broken,
> > and were basically released simply because some folks needed to test
> > how well some new code integrated into the tree.
> >
>
> The only way to test source code integration is to compile it. Clearly,
> the stuff being posted isn't being compiled as a complete project. Yeah
> the various portions may compile just fine, clean as a whistle... but as
> a whole it... well... doesn't.
>
> My humble perception is... the new kernel versions are being posted for
> a reason other than what they are intended for. What it is? I dunno.
Yes. For kernel hackers. If you don't have a clue what you're doing, you
should not be doing it with UNSTABLE kernels. Some will destroy all your
files (one of the 2.3.x kernels comes to mind). When the 2.5.x kernels
are ready for wider user (i.e., for folks who need to get a jump on what's
coming, etc., they'll first issue -pre kernels, like 2.6.0-pre1). Then
they'll probably issue 2.6.0-rc1 (release candidate 1). If all's well,
this more widely tested kernel will become 2.6.0.
The UNSTABLE branch is for development. As each new development snapshot
is released, developers can see how their code fits with everyone else'.
They do need folks to test their code. But if you expect a kernel to
compile without a lot of work on your part, you need to stick to the
STABLE tree (2.4.x).
Ciao,
David A. Bandel
--
Focus on the dream, not the competition.
-- Nemesis Racing Team motto
_______________________________________________
Linux-users mailing list - http://linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL.
