Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, BJ Quinn wrote:
>
> > True, but a search for zfs "segmentation fault" returns 500 bugs.
> > It's possible one of those is related to my issue, but it would take
> > all day to find out. If it's not "flaky" or "unstable", I'd like to
> > try upgrading to the newest kernel first, unless my Linux mindset is
> > truly out of place here, or if it's not relatively easy to do. Are
> > these kernels truly considered stable? How would I upgrade? -- This
>
> Linux and Solaris are quite different when it comes to kernel
> strategies. Linux documents and stabilizes its kernel interfaces
Linux does not implement stable kernel interfaces. It may be that there is
an intention to do so but I've seen problems on Linux resulting from
self-incompatibility on a regular base.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
