Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Sep 1999 11:57:49 -0700 (PDT) | From | Joe <> | Subject | Re: Shortening the Development Cycle... [maybe OffTopic, flame-bait?] |
| |
> This sounds reasonable for most features, except that some of > the > newer features would not get exercised. However, since > newbies and > commercial users usually use the "stable" series, this would > be a safe approach.
I use the stable kernel too, and I am not a newbie, but that's beside the point.
> it or not we are in competition with Microsoft and hence a > target for them -- including FUD, millions of $ of it.
well we are in competition with other OSes too, but that aside > Maybe goals like: > 1. all features in by 2.2.20
um 2.3.20 or 2.2.20 ?
> 2. bug fixes until about 2.2.25 or 30 then declare a "beta > kernel" > and ask for extensive testing
again 2.3.25, or 2.2.25?
> Also, how about a kernel-kit for beta testers, including: > - file system check software (like someone on the list asked > for)
it would be better to modify e2fsck to be able to run fsck on a mounted filesytem. makeing it more like umssync under a umsdos fs.
> - memory test software
make -j bzImage
will test your memory, trust me I found this out and was able to fix my problem by slowing down the reads in the bios. believe it or not gcc is one of the better memeory testors.
> - network test software
netstat is not enough?
> [yes I know, many of these exist, but why not put them in a > package?]
some distros have them and more...
> 2.2 has been out for what, nearly 9 months and some of us > (myself > included) are having stability problems with it....
I have to agree.
Joe
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
- 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/
| |