Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for December 5, 2013
Deadline scheduling: coming soon?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 27, 2013
ACPI for ARM?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 21, 2013
The kernel has a no-regression policy!? Where is this policy written down? Is it actually followed? I can't wait to learn more.
Who is Fedora for?
Posted Mar 12, 2010 17:24 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)
what it says is that it is not allowable to break some set of users with a patch to fix some other set of users (frequently justified by 'it helps more people than it hurts')
also, if a regression is bisected to a particular patch, that patch will probably be reverted rather than to ship with that regression in place.
Posted Mar 19, 2010 19:59 UTC (Fri) by ariveira (guest, #57833)
Well that is not obviously allways the case (at least for me)
There you have bisected with a one-liner that I still have to revert
myself release after release.
They are probably waiting until I buy another wifi card ... :(
Posted Mar 19, 2010 21:06 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)
having said that, you should probably post about this on the kernel mailing list (you do not need to be subscribed to do so), and CC Linus. This is the sort of thing that causes him to jump on the maintainers (and sometimes do the revert himself if the maintainers choose to not revert the problem)
unfortunately at this point it's been broken long enough for other people to make the claim that it doesn't matter much since others haven't complained, but that's usually not considered an acceptable answer when there is a person with the hardware (you) complaining.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds