On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 09:11, Radu-Cristian FOTESCU <[email protected]>wrote:
> To end this flamewar: when I decide to use a > cauldron/cooker/rawhide/unstable system, I expect I will need to fix some > breakages, but at least > (1) let me have a proper choice of kernels in GRUB, including the previous > one; > (2) don't force UNRELEASED kernels on me! > This thread was certainly amused and very fruitful for at least my fortunes file, but may I suggest you to start using some other distribution or operating system which better satisfies your needs, and leave us, poor mortals, with Mandriva/Mageia stable/cooker/cauldron gnu/linux solutions - which work the way we love? :) They are imperfect, they have unreleased versions all the time, they have breakages, upgrades, updates, flaws, problems, design issues, and so on - but this is fine for us! > Breaking a package is one thing, breaking the kernel is a totally different > one. > And breaking a window is totally different as well, I agree :(. As well as breaking a leg for example, and breaking habits. And let us not forget that it is completely and if I might say, even oppository - to breaking a home run (all via http://www.thefreedictionary.com/break)! > And no, I won't investigate anything, I'll not file any report on what it's > not working with this kernel and my hardware. > Yep, I have already realized this, but thanks to confirming nonetheless :). > Regressions in kernels are the thing I hate the most in this world. Yes, this is certainly one of the cruelest and merciless things in the world, I must agree.. :( > I've experienced kernel regressions in the past every 6 months with each > and every Ubuntu release -- and those were kernels supposed to be tested > well-enough. > Apparently they weren't. Let me apologize on behalf of Ubuntu developers and Linus Torvalds himself for not being proactive enough to make kernels work on your hardware, I believe that they will be really ashamed of themselves at the moment they'll read this. Sorry :(. > What I like in Linux is never the kernel. This seems to be apparently contradictory to some other phrases, but I have to agree - I like never kernel, for example, the 3.0 seems to be great (for me!) > Never ever. World is soooo busy those days... > It's monolithic, impossible to be properly tested, and managed by a stupid > fat arrogant guy called Linus. Yep, I agree, he will be even more ashamed of himself after reading this... :( The only kernels I loved were 1.2.13 and1.3.18. 2.2.16 was pretty cool, and 2.4.1 with reiserfs was nice too, but yes, those new shiny trending things - even being a bit cool - are still among the most hated things, this is so very true :(. I have to confess that they must learn a thing or two from DOS - almost 30 years without a remote hole in default install, and working as stable and fast as possible since their first release! > After that, the kernel was just a nuisance -- like the government, the > taxes, the Microsoft tax, etc. > Yep, I agree with you, the governments, taxes, Microsoft and its tax are almost as bad as kernel regressions (mentioned above), but they are still are a far cry from those! But once again, let me apologize for the Linux community, Free Software developers, Linus Torvalds himself and - of course - mr. Richard Matthew Stallman for not being proactive enough in their efforts to make GNU/Linux working on your computer in most flawless and perfect way. I believe they feel really achamed now and as a sign of my support for their cause, and due to my involvement in the open source community, I will mourn those tragic events today with a minute of silence on this mailing list (starting now). -- Eugeni Dodonov http://eugeni.dodonov.net/
