Re: starting with 2.7

[Bill Davidsen]

Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Jan 2005, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> > The main advantage with stable kernels in the good old days (tm) when 4
>
>
> > Nowadays in 2.6, every new 2.6 kernel has several regressions compared
> > to the previous one, and additionally obsolete but used code like
>
>
> 2.2 before 2.2.20 also had this kind of problem, as did
> the 2.4 kernel before 2.4.20 or thereabouts.
>
> I'm pretty sure 2.6 is actually doing better than the
> early 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4 kernels...
2.6 is doing better in terms of staying up, not eating my files, etc. 
I'm less sure about the things being 'changed' (by design) vs. 'broken' 
(by unintended bug introduction). My sense is that there are people who 
want to remove features which are not broken nor causing huge overhead 
or developer effort.

--
   -bill davidsen (davidsen@xxxxxxx)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
 last possible moment - but no longer"  -me
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/