-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 At some point hitherto, Ken D'Ambrosio hath spake thusly: > On Mon, 2002-01-14 at 12:09, Benjamin Scott wrote: > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Paul Lussier wrote: > > > Adaptec has had a lot of problems, especially with Linux drivers. > > > There was one person maintaining his own drivers for linux, then Adaptec > > > came along and said ... > > > > Yet another reason to avoid 2.4. I am starting to think that 2.4 is the > > Ford Edsel of Linux. At the rate things are going, 2.6 might be stable > > before 2.4 is. > > I have to disagree. I remember 1.0.0, 1.2.0, 2.0.0, and 2.2.0 -- *all* > of them had their share of nay-sayers.
And I have to disagree with you. I've generally found that if you want your system to actually work well and reliably, you'll want to wait until at least the point where Linus has passed the kernel on to the "stable" maintainer. Even then, you can have problems. The 2.2 series didn't really solidify until 2.2.18, which had a security problem which caused 2.2.19 to be released soon after. Unfortunately, the "fix" didn't, and 2.2.20 was eventually released to finally (hopefully) fix the hole. > And Linus has never hidden the fact that he has no problem > publishing kernels that break drivers, his opinion being that, if > the code is needed, someone'll fix it, and if it isn't, it'll > eventually get deprecated and then removed. Alas, I've seen many > discussions about how stupid Adaptec's been lately (~ 2 years) with > regards to drivers, be it making their own, or publishing > specs. When it came to SCSI, my mantra used to be "There is no > adapter but Adaptec, and I am their prophet", but this has, alas, > changed... and it's not 2.4's fault if Adaptec's made this happen. I'm familiar with the arguments, and they make some sense. As for whether or not it's the kernel developer's fault the Adaptec drivers don't work: No, but it doesn't much matter either if you have Adaptec hardware, does it? If it don't work, it don't work. Plain and simple. BTW, a suggestion for people who have this problem: Build an SMP kernel, even if you only have one CPU, or make sure IO-APIC support is turned on. This MAY help. Or may not. It worked for me with the Red Hat supplied version of 2.4.7 which comes with RH 7.2. > As for other issues with 2.4 -- they're getting worked on. After > the fiasco that was 2.4.15, I think they're pretty much to the point > where it's a usable, production-ready kernel. Maybe... but would you bet your company's life on it? - -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - --------------------------------------------- I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8Q4JVdjdlQoHP510RAh+LAJ4g+1frfXYGXhmSFm9U914phayufwCfQxt6 BIXhCCh72Y22IJRwjc2P8uw= =Lu6K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ***************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *****************************************************************
