On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 17:21:18 -0500 (EST) Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jul 2004, Collins Richey wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 11:53:44 -0500 (EST) > > Net Llama! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Based on my recent research, here are my recommendations: > > > > > > > > 1. If you want to be assured of xfs support, get the latest 2.6 > > > > kernel recommended by xfs. > > No one would expect them to work on a year old kernel. The archived > > entries on the xfs list re gentoo indicated that they didn't like to > > see patches they hadn't approved and they seemed to believe (but did > > not document) that patches they preferred to see were not present. > > Why should they support someone else's patches? Would you ask a Ford > dealer to honor your Cadillac warranty? There are no magic patches in > standard, mainline kernels released by Linus for XFS. I'm not clear > on what patches you're referring to, but if someone is using what > Linus releases, the XFS developers have never refused to help someone. I wish I knew what patches they are referring to, magic or otherwise?! The postings from the XFS archives are heavy on the "screw you and the distro/kernel you rode in on" and light (nonexistent) on the "this patch is a problem, that patch is missing". I find it difficult to understand that a kernel that includes newer patches for communications or ethernet devices or sound cards or ???, for example, would be rejected when the user is reporting a broken filesystem. > > > > Once again, based on the bitter language I encountered in the > > archives. > > ... Are you looking at stuff from before XFS was merged into the > official kernel? > Nope. I only looked at reports using 2.6 kernels. > > Direct quote from the archives. Sorry, I failed to add ... or > > Debian. > > > > "NEVER USE GENTOO. Immature Hacks + Bugs == Gentoo. Please get a > > real kernel from oss.sgi.comand see if that helps. Better still, > > RUN, don't walk, and get Red Hat or Debian installer." > > Exactly. Use Debian or Redhat so that you get a kernel that can be > supported rather than someone catting /dev/random and calling it a > kernel patch. You can get any kernel you want including a Debian or Redhat kernel if you prefer. Gentoo is kernel agnostic. Obviously SUSE and Mandrake users need not apply for support, either. > > I get a very different sort of response from gentoo developers when > > I report a problem that is based on non-stable components. They > > first attempt to analyze/fix the problem (or pass the problem > > upstream to the package maintainers) rather than maligning me for my > > choice of > > Gentoo developers had damn well better support what they release. > That's a completely different thing than expecting a different group > of developers to support those patches. Here we go again. No one is asking XFS to support someone else's patches, but it would be preferable if they would not reject reported problems with XFS (ex., broken filesystem) out of hand without even looking at the problem (per the archives). > > The XFS guys have chosen the official tree, Redhat's and more > informally Debian's. THey didn't choose GEntoo's. That's the facts of > life. Yep, you're right, they didn't, but that's a little short sighted, IMO. > No offense intended to those using gentoo (honestly), but seeing how > easy it is to use gentoo's build system, a bumbling idiot could build > a kernel with stupid buggy patches in it, and then run into problems > down the line. > I intend no offense to those using XFS, either, but the "gentoo is evil" rhetoric is a little tiresome, most especially when no specifics are provided. If I had even one concrete example (this kernel has the following patches that I believe are directly contributing to the problem. This kernel does not include the following patches that I believe are critical for filesystem support. etc.), I would be more comfortable with the process. We would not tolerate this basic lack of documentation for problems reported to linux-users, for example. We would ask the user for specifics. "Your code sucks!" "Can you give me an example?" "No, your code sucks!" "Why do you think it sucks!" "I'm not familiar with the code, but it sucks!" "Oh" I'm sure that XFS is a perfectly good filesystem, but the attitude of some who support it sucks. -- /\/\ ( CR ) Collins Richey \/\/ fly Independence Air - they run Linux _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsub/Pause/Etc -> http://mail.linux-sxs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
