This is all true, however kernel 2.4 has been out a long time (in various
beta versions). Basically, a commercial company that writes linux
software needs to use this time (while the kernel is in beta) to look at
the changes in the kernel architecture and begin adapting and modifying
their software so that when it's released (as 2.4 was in January) the new
compatible version is right ready to ship out the door. 2.4 has been in
beta and development for a long time, long enough to make even drastic
changes to your kernel modifications. (Perhaps if there's some real
sticky points, the kernel developers have some ideas.)
As far as people talking about the cutting edge of linux, kernel 2.4 is
hardly cutting-edge anymore. Also, waiting until major distros support
2.4 is not a good idea either. From the comments on this list I'd say
that most of use are not newbies and most of us have customized our
distros to some degree and built custom kernels. (This is not to say that
netraverse should not worry about it's newbie customers -- netraverse is
doing a good job helping out in that area). Redhat 7.1 is actually almost
out (it's in public beta now -- expect it within a week or so, I think)
and will have the 2.4.x kernel be the default kernel. If that's what
you're waiting for, then redhat 7.1's release will have to be your time
table.
I'd sure like to continue using your wonderful product, but I'm anxious to
take advantage of the new features (such as promise udma support which is
all my computer has -- I had to manually patch the kernel as two patches I
needed conflicted). In the meantime I'll be one of those still using
2.2.18 while I wait, somewhat patiently.
Michael
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, robert w hall wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dean S.
> Messing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >
> >Regarding the Nth (N == a large number) query to NeTraverse (this time
> >by Richard Fish) about when the 2.4.x version of W4L is going to be
> >out we get this from Mike Badger:
> > :: But to answer your question about 2.4, we don't have a set time line
> > :: at this time.
> > ::
> > :: Thanks,
> > :: Mike Badger
> > :: NeTraverse
> >
> >Forgive the vituperative tone of my note but this is a useless
> >non-answer. I (and I suspect many, many others who use W4L) are
> >growing more and more impatient with NetTraverse for giving this sort
> >of answer. It was fine when 4.0.0 came out. It was slightly annoying
> >when 4.0.1 came out. But, for goodness sake, its been months now.
> >
> whilst I sympathise with your frustration, if you follow this list
> properly (it is not only a write-only medium you know) you will find all
> the info you need, recorded several times, to answer the questions you
> pose.
>
> As has been pointed out many times, there were late and major changes to
> the 2.4 kernel handling of virtual memory & processes - mkivmem in
> particular appears clearly very affected by this. If you have the
> technical skills to contribute in this area, I'm sure Netraverse will
> welcome your help, under an NDA of course, and perhaps even contrive
> some appropriate reward :-).
>
> (I suspect that the problem they're trying to solve is probably
> comparable with, and indeed related to, porting to FreeBSD)
>
> If like the rest of us, you know your limitations in this area, then I
> suggest you bide your time and wait for a quality solution. I for one
> value stability in my linux box above most else!
>
> That said, it would be nice if Netraverse would post at least some
> technical confirmation of the defence we semi-educated users are putting
> up for them!
>
>
> Bob
>
_______________________________________________
Win4Lin-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.netraverse.com/mailman/listinfo/win4lin-users
