In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.4.10.10001090252500.584-100000@mirkwood.dummy.home>,
Rik van Riel <riel@nl.linux.org> wrote:
>On Sun, 9 Jan 2000, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>
>> The industrial use of Linux is not at the desktop.
>
>Industrial use of Linux usually doesn't involve the kernels
>which are marked as `development', ie. where the `middle'
>version number is odd and where major things are expected
>to change.
Except, of course, that when the changes go in they are
never backed out so the interfaces remain stable for
the production kernels. That's the *really* annoying
thing about this line of argument; when else should
someone complain that an interface has been turned into
gravel? If you wait until the development tree has
become a production tree, enough code will be modified
to work with the New! And! Improved! interfaces that
your complaints (cf: old-style fcntl locking) will be
dismissed sight unseen by the Core Team.
>People venturing out on that terrain can know what they're
>heading into (see http://kt.linuxcare.com/)
The big support providers are the ones who benefit from
interface churning. It's the small shops that get bitten
in the ass because they don't have enough money to buy
programmers or enough time to do the patches.
____
david parsons \bi/ If you can't tell, I hate that argument.
\/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 15 2000 - 21:00:13 EST