Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 07:31:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 07:31:23 -0500 Received: from Morgoth.esiway.net ([193.194.16.157]:14598 "EHLO Morgoth.esiway.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 07:31:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 13:31:08 +0100 (CET) From: Marco Colombo To: Alan Cox cc: , Subject: Re: Aunt Tillie builds a kernel (was Re: ISA hardware discovery -- the elegant solution) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Alan Cox wrote: > > > Because the GPL says he's entitled to them ? > > > > You miss my point. Sure he's entitled to them. But why should he > > *have to have them*? They're extra state which, in the presence > > of a proper autoconfigurator, he doesn't need. > > You have it backwards. The _autoconfigurator_ is extra state which in the > presence of the config he doesn't need > - > 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/ > Alan, Eric (and others, too), please. Of course the autoconfigurator is an useful piece of software. And of course Eric is posting to the wrong list here. Kernel developers don't need any autoconfigurator at all (yes, it's just "extra state"). Eric, Aunt Tillie doesn't need any custom-made, untested, probably not working kernel. QA comes at a price. The lastest VM fix may take a while to reach mainstream kernels. That's life. Face it, you're under the wrong assumption that Alan's 2.2 or Marcelo's 2.4 vanilla kernels are "better" than their patched counterparts shipped by distro vendors. This is far from the truth[*]. Only very recent 2.2 kernels can be installed on a Red Hat 6.x with little pain. Call it Red Hat's fault, or mine, for choosing RH, (it's not Alan's of course), but I wanted RAID 0.90 from the beginning. Maybe today you can upgrade most 2.4-based distros to the latest Marcelo's, but I bet it's going to change as soon as vendors start patching their own kernels with random backports from 2.5. No matter how you put it, 99% of the times your autoconfigurator will produce a previuosly untested configuration. We can discuss about release policies forever, but Marcelo isn't expected to replicate all the QA job vendors do before releasing a kernel. Now, the kernel is modular enough not to turn the issue into a nightmare for the average developer. Most of the time you DO keep your old .config around. And you know your HW. And the vanilla kernel you've just compiled happens to work. But you'd better do some testing before putting it on any production box. And of course, I consider Aunt Tillie's PC definitely "production". In the end, I think you're just pushing the right piece of software on the wrong list. IMHO, endusers compiling the kernel it's not an l-k issue, it's a distro one. [*] That is, from Aunt Tillie's standpoint. .TM. -- ____/ ____/ / / / / Marco Colombo ___/ ___ / / Technical Manager / / / ESI s.r.l. _____/ _____/ _/ Colombo@ESI.it - 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/