On 14 Jan 2002, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote:
> ... And Linus has never hidden the fact that he has no problem
> publishing kernels that break drivers ...
> ... it's not 2.4's fault if Adaptec's made this happen ...
> ... As for other issues with 2.4 -- they're getting worked on ...

  I'm not trying to lay blame, or point to this or that.  Nor am I taking
issue with Linus's well-known policy, which I actually agree with.  Nor am I
denying that Adaptec's developer information policies are stupid -- they
are, as are most vendors.  The only thing I am saying is that reasons not to
use 2.4 appear to out-number reasons to use it.  The how or why of it is
immaterial.  While I am wearing my system administrator's hat, I don't care
*why* the Adaptec SCSI drivers are broken in 2.4, just that they are.

  Putting on my Open Source Armchair Quarterback hat instead, I believe
these problems *will* eventually be solved.  Open Source is good at that.
However, nothing in Open Source says they will be solved before 2.6 is
released (although I don't expect it to take *that* long).  It is quite
acceptable for Open Source to throw out things that don't work.

> ... the fiasco that was 2.4.15, I think they're pretty much to the point
> where it's a usable, production-ready kernel.

  Last I heard (a week or two ago), there was still significant in-fighting
going on over the memory manager.

-- 
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not |
| necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or  |
| organization.  All information is provided without warranty of any kind.  |


*****************************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body.
*****************************************************************

Reply via email to