On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:51:32 PST, Eric Anopolsky said:
> their own kernels in the first place. IMHO, it's reasonable to expect
> the small minority of Linux users who want to compile their own kernels
> to learn that "EXPERIMENTAL" means something.
And what, exactly, does it mean, given that ther
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Most people and all distributions use CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL=y simply
> because too many options (including options required for hardware
> support) depend on it.
>
> Compare e.g.:
> - "Marvell SATA support (HIGHLY EXPERIMENTAL)"
> - "Provide NFSv4 client support (EXPERIMENTAL)
> > Isn't CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL enough?
>
> Most people and all distributions use CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL=y simply
> because too many options (including options required for hardware
> support) depend on it.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think most people use the distro-provided
precompiled kernels. This is
On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 23:16 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 07:26:29PM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote:
> > El Wed, 2 Jan 2008 03:32:18 +0200, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> >
> > > It might make sense to offer ext4 in -mm and even in early -rc kernels,
> > > but I've
> Stable kernels are mainly meant for usage, not for trying stuff.
You appear to be reinventing history in your attempt to justify removing
CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL.
> And although I see a point in perhaps shipping some not-yet-perfect
> device drivers for otherwise unsupported hardware or some
> not
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 07:26:29PM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote:
> El Wed, 2 Jan 2008 03:32:18 +0200, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
>
> > It might make sense to offer ext4 in -mm and even in early -rc kernels,
> > but I've already seen people using ext4 simply because a stable kernel
>
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 10:41:57 -0700
Andreas Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 02, 2008 03:32 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > It might make sense to offer ext4 in -mm and even in early -rc kernels,
> > but I've already seen people using ext4 simply because a stable kernel
> > offered it - a
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 10:41:57AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Jan 02, 2008 03:32 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > It might make sense to offer ext4 in -mm and even in early -rc kernels,
> > but I've already seen people using ext4 simply because a stable kernel
> > offered it - and that's def
El Wed, 2 Jan 2008 03:32:18 +0200, Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> It might make sense to offer ext4 in -mm and even in early -rc kernels,
> but I've already seen people using ext4 simply because a stable kernel
> offered it - and that's definitely not intended.
But isn't that the w
On Jan 02, 2008 03:32 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> It might make sense to offer ext4 in -mm and even in early -rc kernels,
> but I've already seen people using ext4 simply because a stable kernel
> offered it - and that's definitely not intended.
>
> Anyone who _really_ wants to test ext4 should
It might make sense to offer ext4 in -mm and even in early -rc kernels,
but I've already seen people using ext4 simply because a stable kernel
offered it - and that's definitely not intended.
Anyone who _really_ wants to test ext4 should anyway be able to do the
trivial change of removing the "
11 matches
Mail list logo
