Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
New kernels and old distributionsNew kernels and old distributionsPosted Aug 3, 2006 20:54 UTC (Thu) by wilck (subscriber, #29844)In reply to: New kernels and old distributions by jbailey Parent article: New kernels and old distributions
If all end-users followed our advice, the number of people deploying (and therefore testing) kernel.org kernels would be even smaller than it currently is. That's one thing Andrew doesn't want to happen.
(Log in to post comments)
New kernels and old distributions Posted Aug 7, 2006 12:01 UTC (Mon) by malor (subscriber, #2973) [Link] The way to get more people to test is by making kernel.org kernels actually stable enough for use.
They have declared that the distros are the ones that have to make it work. Kernel.org kernels are officially no longer for end-user consumption. So, of course, people just run distro kernels.
I used to roll my own all the time, but I've been forced into that corner along with everyone else.
If they took responsbility for making stable kernels STABLE (which means they need to support them longer than two bloody months), they'd get many more testers.
Their decision to just handwave and expect the distros to actually make the code work means that only the distros do any testing.
Fundamentally, Linux is moving too fast. They are blaming the users for not testing enough, instead of themselves for shoveling in reams of untested code before the last batch has even started to settle.
It's only the fact that they're such brilliant coders that's saving them. And as good as they are, they're still having major problems. I guaran-damn-tee you that we're gonna be digging up severe security flaws for YEARS from this high-speed, low-contemplation environment.
There were 27 releases of 2.6.16. If they found that many problems that fast, just think of how many *subtle* security issues must be lurking.
|
|||||||||||||