Well, unfortunately, you guys are still talking a little above my head. I
kind of understand what you are saying but not completely. Are the -aa
and -ac patches? How do you install/run a patch? Are they tags to put in
when compiling? What is VM28-vm30? All I've done so far is untar the
tarballs from kernel.org (or wherever) and go from there. Finally started
having success with it, but all this stuff that you guys are talking about
on the development level is a little above me. Which, BTW, is partly why I
subscribed to the mailing list - to try to learn a little more. So could
you guys be a little more specific in the explanations?
Thanks,
Charles Heselton
Network Installer
Staffing Alternatives, Inc.
619.261.6866
charles_heselton@hotmail.com <mailto:charles_heselton@hotmail.com>
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org]On Behalf Of Robert Love
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 2206
To: Mike Fedyk
Cc: charles-heselton@cox.net; Dieter N?tzel; Dan Mann; Linux Kernel
List; J.A. Magallon
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.5.6 Interactive performance
On Sat, 2002-03-09 at 23:38, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 11:23:48PM -0500, Robert Love wrote:
> > The 2.5 tree also has most of these toys, and is a better place for this
> > development IMO. Personally, I'd stay away from these all-in-one silly
> > patches that are floating around these days. Your safest bet is just
> > stock 2.4.18 or whatever is latest, although the above addons are all at
> > varying levels of "stable" and "safe".
> >
>
> Then what do you call -aa and -ac? ;)
>
> These "all-in-one" patches do make it harder to debug specific patches,
but
> it does create a wider audience for many patches that wouldn't be used
> otherwise.
I don't put -aa nor -ac in the same category as what I refer to above.
Alan and Andrea's trees both contain an intelligent combination of
useful patches, bug fixes, and code from Alan and Andrea themselves.
The plethora of all-in-one every-patch-under-the-sun patchsets don't
fall into the above category, in my opinion. They just mix various new
feature patches. They do offer one benefit: much wider exposure for
some potentially very useful patches. I have found, however, that they
don't help the actual patch authors much since (a) they are mixed in
with many other patches and possibly even erroneously merged and (b) the
bug reports never make it upstream to the actual patch maintainers.
Maybe I'm just annoyed by the even greater signal-to-noise ratio on lkml
:-)
Robert Love
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 15 2002 - 22:00:13 EST