Re: Hey kernel hackers, this is worth a read.
On Fri, Jul 30, 1999 at 08:58:09PM -0700, "Jordan K. Hubbard" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://features.linuxtoday.com/stories/8191.html A story on upcoming plans for the Linux 2.4 kernel. Since they're going after a lot of the same performance goals we are, it's worth a read. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message From the article: "Linux 2.4 also includes a completely rewritten networking layer." Great. After a few years from now when they get all the bugs out, they will be right back to the quality of early 4.4BSD quality ;) However, the SMP stuff they are working on is something we need IMHO. -- yan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: Hey kernel hackers, this is worth a read.
On Fri, Jul 30, 1999 at 08:58:09PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard j...@zippy.cdrom.com wrote: http://features.linuxtoday.com/stories/8191.html A story on upcoming plans for the Linux 2.4 kernel. Since they're going after a lot of the same performance goals we are, it's worth a read. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Hey kernel hackers, this is worth a read.
Jan B. Koum wrote: On Fri, Jul 30, 1999 at 08:58:09PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard j...@zippy.cdrom.com wrote: http://features.linuxtoday.com/stories/8191.html From the article: Linux 2.4 also includes a completely rewritten networking layer. Great. After a few years from now when they get all the bugs out, they will be right back to the quality of early 4.4BSD quality ;) However, the SMP stuff they are working on is something we need IMHO. Agreed on both counts. I also like the idea of shorter turnover time between major branches. We've already got a pretty considerable amount of stuff that can't be ported back to -Stable without major headaches. It's not always easy to know exactly where to draw the line, but I think that the move from 3-4 should probably take less time than the move from 2-3 did. Doug To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Hey kernel hackers, this is worth a read.
On Sun, 1 Aug 1999, Doug wrote: Jan B. Koum wrote: On Fri, Jul 30, 1999 at 08:58:09PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard j...@zippy.cdrom.com wrote: http://features.linuxtoday.com/stories/8191.html From the article: Linux 2.4 also includes a completely rewritten networking layer. Great. After a few years from now when they get all the bugs out, they will be right back to the quality of early 4.4BSD quality ;) However, the SMP stuff they are working on is something we need IMHO. Agreed on both counts. I also like the idea of shorter turnover time between major branches. We've already got a pretty considerable amount of stuff that can't be ported back to -Stable without major headaches. It's not always easy to know exactly where to draw the line, but I think that the move from 3-4 should probably take less time than the move from 2-3 did. Aye, and it shall. The 3.X branch should be the -STABLE branch for only about a bit more than a year total, IIRC :) But 4.0 should also include things that aren't even here yet, like pccard rewrites and the redone VFS, maybe a rewrite of ipfw if we can agree on that, the IPv6 stacks being merged in, PAO changes being accepted into the main branch (at least some of them), finer-grained SMP (probably per-subsystem)... The turnaround time will be less, but we'll still have a LOT of great new things :) Doug To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message Brian Fundakowski Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___ ___ gr...@freebsd.org _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve!_ __ | _ \._ \ |) | http://www.FreeBSD.org/ _ |___/___/___/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Hey kernel hackers, this is worth a read.
http://features.linuxtoday.com/stories/8191.html A story on upcoming plans for the Linux 2.4 kernel. Since they're going after a lot of the same performance goals we are, it's worth a read. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Re: Hey kernel hackers, this is worth a read.
On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: http://features.linuxtoday.com/stories/8191.html A story on upcoming plans for the Linux 2.4 kernel. Since they're going after a lot of the same performance goals we are, it's worth a read. It seems to me that a lot of the features mentioned are already in -CURRENT and some in -STABLE. Hmm. I rather liked this paragraph: Users who connect to Windows shares via SMB will be pleased that there is no longer a compile time option for enabling bug workarounds for Win9x. Instead, Linux 2.4 will be able to detect the type of machine it is connected to and react accordingly. This will make Linux a much better option overall in homogenous networks. :^) - alex You wear guilt, like shackles on your feet, Like a halo in reverse - Depeche Mode To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Hey kernel hackers, this is worth a read.
http://features.linuxtoday.com/stories/8191.html A story on upcoming plans for the Linux 2.4 kernel. Since they're going after a lot of the same performance goals we are, it's worth a read. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Hey kernel hackers, this is worth a read.
On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: http://features.linuxtoday.com/stories/8191.html A story on upcoming plans for the Linux 2.4 kernel. Since they're going after a lot of the same performance goals we are, it's worth a read. It seems to me that a lot of the features mentioned are already in -CURRENT and some in -STABLE. Hmm. I rather liked this paragraph: Users who connect to Windows shares via SMB will be pleased that there is no longer a compile time option for enabling bug workarounds for Win9x. Instead, Linux 2.4 will be able to detect the type of machine it is connected to and react accordingly. This will make Linux a much better option overall in homogenous networks. :^) - alex You wear guilt, like shackles on your feet, Like a halo in reverse - Depeche Mode To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
