Re: starting with 2.7

From: Marcelo Tosatti
Date: Thu Jan 06 2005 - 12:19:54 EST


On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 08:59:08AM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:45:19AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > You got to be kidding now?
> > 99% of the features distributions have applied to their 2.4 based kernels
> > are "enterprise" features such as direct IO, AIO, etc.
> > Really I can't recall any "attempt to make 2.4 stable" from the distros,
> > its mostly "attempt to backport nice v2.6 feature".
> > Do you have any example?
> [tytso's comments elided]
> > It took sometime to happen, but instability related to "high memory
> > pressure" has been fixed in almost all cases long ago (the only
> > remaining issue to my knowledged is loopback device with highmemory).
> > I hardly see complaints of "crashes under load" problems since
> > v2.4.19/20 or so.
>
> I am unfortunately holding 2.4.x' earlier history against it. While you
> were maintaining it, much of what we're discussing was resolved.
> Unfortunately, the stabilization you're talking about was essentially
> too late; distros had long-since wildly diverged, they had frozen on
> older releases, and the damage to Linux' reputation was already done.
> I'm also unaware of major commercial distros (e.g. Red Hat, SuSE) using
> 2.4.x more recent than 2.4.21 as a baseline, and it's also notable that
> one of the largest segments of the commercial userbase I see is using a
> distro kernel based on 2.4.9.

I agree.

-
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/