Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:40:12 +0100 | From | Stephan von Krawczynski <> | Subject | Re: Debian Kernels was: 2.6.0test9 Reiserfs boot time "buffer layer error at fs/buffer.c:431" |
| |
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:27:36 -0500 Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:05:09 +0100, Pavel Machek said: > > > Okay, in the perfect world we'd have just one distribution with all > > packages unmodified. Well.. but we are not there yet. > > Then why do we have a -mm kernel and a -ac kernel and a.....? > > It's interesting that we've apparently decided that Andrew Morton or > Alan Cox or any of the other -initial kernel streams are allowed to have > different goals (and thus different code to achieve those goals) but > we seem to think that distributions are not allowed to do the same thing...
There is quite a simple difference in -XX kernel and a distro-patch. People have to actively decide to use some patched kernel for whatever their reason may be. A distro on the other hand floods the average user with patched versions _without_ the users' active decision. Please keep in mind that a lot of users are not capable of compiling/installing a new kernel. Those who are have a free decision, those who are not have simply no choice.
> -exec-shield is OK if it shows up in Andrew's stuff, but not when it's > in the RedHat from whence it came? What's wrong with THAT?
s.a.
Regards, Stephan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |