On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Larry Marshall wrote:
> If you want to remain on the bleeding edge of Linux development, then
> certainly VMware is the application of choice. Win4Lin gains its
> advantages by being tightly dependent upon specialized kernels. These
> things don' constrain VMware compatibility. Neither does the aloof
> nature of VMware provide the performance and transparency of Win4lin.
> So, you make your choices. Personally, I think it's odd that people
> expect Win4lin to sit on the cutting edge of Linux. There is
> currently NO distribution that depends upon the 2.4 kernel. When that
> occurs, complain. Until then I just don't see the argument but that's
> what's great about the Linux world, isn't it? You get to make
> choices.
>
2.4.0-pre kernels were the end of "cutting edge". 2.4.0 is a stable
kernel. It's not bleeding edge, it's standard. Distros may not depend on
2.4, but hardware is another matter. USB (which can be patched into 2.2) is
only standard on 2.4. Same with DRI. Same with the new firewall support.
> People really do need to get a grip, however, if they believe that
> they are somehow "owed" tight time frames for particular feature
> release from ANY software company. To confuse public announcement
> with a lack of internal scheduling and projection, as we've just seen
> here, is simply naive.
>
It doesn't seem like a 2.4 patch would be a particularly tight time-frame
of development: late 2.3 kernels and pre-release 2.4 kernels have been around
for about a year. Of course Trelos doesn't "owe" me anything: they sold me a
product which does exactly what it was advertised to do. I just think the
situation of being unable to use Win4Lin sucks ass, is all.
---GEC
Projects page: http://tetsujin.sourceforge.net/
(M-x all-hail-emacs)
_______________________________________________
Win4Lin-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.netraverse.com/mailman/listinfo/win4lin-users
