Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750738AbVKFLzG (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Nov 2005 06:55:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750749AbVKFLzG (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Nov 2005 06:55:06 -0500 Received: from 83-64-96-243.bad-voeslau.xdsl-line.inode.at ([83.64.96.243]:19413 "EHLO mognix.dark-green.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750738AbVKFLzF (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Nov 2005 06:55:05 -0500 Message-ID: <436DEF22.4010903@ed-soft.at> Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 12:55:14 +0100 From: Edgar Hucek User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jerome lacoste Cc: Jean Delvare , LKML Subject: Re: New Linux Development Model References: <436C7E77.3080601@ed-soft.at> <20051105122958.7a2cd8c6.khali@linux-fr.org> <436CB162.5070100@ed-soft.at> <5a2cf1f60511060252t55e1a058o528700ea69826965@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5a2cf1f60511060252t55e1a058o528700ea69826965@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2452 Lines: 78 jerome lacoste wrote: > On 11/5/05, Edgar Hucek wrote: > > >> Hi. >> >> Sorry for not posting my Name. >> >> Maybe you don't understand what i wanted to say or it's my bad english. >> The ipw2200 driver was only an example. I had also problems with, >> vmware, >> unionfs... >> What i mean ist, that kernel developers make incompatible changes to the >> header >> files, change structures, interfaces and so on. Which makes the kernel >> releases >> incompatible. >> > > > I will ask you just one question: as a user, why did you want to > upgrade your kernel? > > Depends on the user and what he wants to do. There are several reasons why a user wanna upgrade to new kernel. Maybe new supported hardware and so on. It's frustrating for the user, have on the one side the new hardware supported but on the other side, mybe broken support for the existing hardware. > On a server you want stability. So you don't upgrade. Sure, but what about securrity updates. When a new kernel release comes out the updates are stopped for older releases. And why should dirstribution makers always backport new security fixes ? > On a desktop, there are probably a bunch of out of kernel modules that > will need > upgrading with each new kernel modules. Just on the laptop I am using > right now, I will have to upgrade the vmware bridge, nvidia driver, > madwifi wireless driver, etc. And that's normal. The new development > model didn't change that. > > From my point of view, it makes a difference if i have to recompile a module or realy upgrade it. > I avoid touching my kernel on boxes I do real work with. I do build a > new kernel for test purposes and to give feedback if there's an issue. > But most of the time I skip 2-3 versions before finding a very > compelling reason to upgrade. And I stick with my distribution kernel > as much as I can. > > > So you wanna say a new "stable" kernel isn't a realy a stable one and i can't relay that it behaves like the older one ? If it's so, then something is completely wrong in kernel development. > As for kernel/drivers developers, it's another story. > > If it ain't broken, don't fix it. > > Jerome > > > cu ED. - 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/