LWN: Comments on "A summary of 2.6.12 API changes"

A summary of 2.6.12 API changes

roelofs — Fri, 01 Jul 2005 20:16:56 +0000

...for all the talk of how the BitKeeper episode slowed down development, this kernel did not actually take much longer than its predecessor.

I suspect most people would consider a 50% increase to be a fairly significant delay--at least, assuming 2.6.11's two months and a week was typical and 2.6.12's three months and two weeks was not. (I generally don't pay that much attention to kernel release intervals unless I need a specific fix or LWN brings it to my attention. :-) )

Not that I'm complaining, of course--considering what got done in that extra month-plus, I think it was time very well spent. And certainly the delay could have been much longer, which I guess was probably the point of the quoted comment...

Greg

Another change

Ross — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 16:36:20 +0000

I ran into some trouble with out-of-tree drivers and changes from 2.6.11.11
to 2.6.12. There was an "id" member deleted from some I2C structure or
something similar. Just deleting the assignments and accesses was enough to
make it work... didn't find much on Google about it.

Sorry to be so non-specific but I don't have access to the box at the moment.

A summary of 2.6.12 API changes

henriksorensen — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 06:52:41 +0000

Thanks for an excellent summary.
Would it be possible for you to also cover new CONFIG options ?

Henrik