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.
Sorry, but i don't have any. I just remember that it happened. You are free to search the XFS mailing list archives (via http://oss.sgi.com ) for gentoo references.
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ L. Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo: http://netllama.ipfox.com
16:39:59 up 24 days, 3:22, 2 users, load average: 0.35, 0.20, 0.07 _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsub/Pause/Etc -> http://mail.linux-sxs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
