| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
ECNECNPosted Oct 28, 2008 1:57 UTC (Tue) by ncm (subscriber, #165)In reply to: ECN by nick.lowe Parent article: Stable kernel 2.6.27.4
Nothing but embarrassment keeps them from releasing 8.10 in November. The insanity lies not in picking a name that implies a target date, but in letting embarrassment at missing the target date trump release quality.
(Log in to post comments)
ECN Posted Oct 28, 2008 8:48 UTC (Tue) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link]
...But they're not compromising release quality. As mentioned upthread, in a comment you replied to before writing this comment, they've already released a workaround -- one that was less risky than re-rolling their whole kernel package, and that had already been tested to fix the problem.
You know I respect you a lot, but in this thread, it feels almost like some need to find things to be angry about is overpowering your technical judgement. Hope everything's alright...
ECN Posted Oct 28, 2008 19:01 UTC (Tue) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link]
Not angry, disgusted. I read through the whole launchpad thread, and was exposed to the denialism you must have missed.
I agree that 8.10 with the procps workaround will work OK on low-speed links. But the workaround is enormously more complicated, and has much broader effect, than the patch, so would need more testing, not less. And how will the workaround ever be got rid of?
My brother runs Ubuntu on his laptop, and brings it to me for fixups. The last upgrade (F -> G) was such a mess I that haven't encouraged him to bring it in for H. I certainly wouldn't suggest he do it himself.
|
|
||||||||||||