Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Ptrace hole / Linux 2.2.25 | From | Felipe Alfaro Solana <> | Date | 23 Mar 2003 23:43:32 +0100 |
| |
On Sun, 2003-03-23 at 23:21, Jeff Garzik wrote: > akpm has suggested something like this in the past. I respectfully > disagree. > > The 2.4 kernel will not benefit from constant churn of backporting core > kernel changes like a new scheduler. We need to let it settle, simply > get it stable, and concentrate on fixing key problems in 2.6. Otherwise > you will never have a stable 2.4 tree, and it will look suspiciously > more and more like 2.6 as time goes by. Constantly breaking working > configurations and changing core behaviors is _not_ the way to go for 2.4. > > I see 2.4 O(1) scheduler and similar features as _pain_ brought on the > vendors by themselves (and their customers). > > Surely it is better to concentrate developer time and mindshare on > making 2.6 sane?
I'm no hardcore kernel hacker, but I fully agree with you. 2.4 is pretty stable... Introducing new code (VM, IDE, etc) is just a bit risky, more even when current 2.4 is 2.4.21 (I would say mature enough).
________________________________________________________________________ Felipe Alfaro Solana Linux Registered User #287198 http://counter.li.org
- 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/
| |