Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Collins Richey wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:57:25 -0500 (EST) > > Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Collins Richey wrote: > > > > On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:51:45 -0500 > > > > Michael Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suppose we could continue this thread along the lines of > > > > > "Now that Gentoo has achieved respectability ...". > > > > > > > > > > > > > Respectability, but probably never full LSB compliance, as one > > > > of the detractors (strangely silent in recent weeks) would say. > > > > > > Just to stire the pot, and play devil's advocate, i will say that > > > it hasn't achiveved respectability in alot of groups. There are > > > some heated attacks on gentoo on the XFS mailign list, and i've > > > seen some snide remarks on LKML as well. > > > > > > > Just curious: do most of the snide remarks come from people who have > > never tried it? I'm sure that the XFS folks would be miffed by the > > fact that a few (but only a very few) gentoo developers have had > > heartburn from XFS (lengthy thread on this list last year). I'm > > curious what problem the LKML folks have with gentoo. > > The majority of the snide remarks come from people who have looked at > Gentoo's special kernel patches and been revulsed. There's a > disturbing corellation between people reporting unreproducable XFS > filesystem corruption and using Gentoo's kernels. >
It would be nice to have specifics. I'd like to pass this on to the gentoo developers. -- /\/\ ( CR ) Collins Richey \/\/ fly Independence Air - they run Linux _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsub/Pause/Etc -> http://mail.linux-sxs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
