mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
Subject: Re: A proposal; making 2.6.20 a bugfix only version.
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 23:22:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1163024531.3138.406.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9a8748490611081409x6b4cc4b4lc52b91c7b7b237a6@mail.gmail.com>


> There's no shortage of issues that need fixing, but since we keep
> merging new stuff, a lot of bugfixing energy gets spend on the new
> cool stuff instead of fixing up any other issues we have.

but if you do this you just end up with a bigger backlog so that the
next one will even be more unstable due to a extreme high change rate.


> Coverity has, as of this writing, identified 728 issues in the current
> kernel. Sure, some of those have already been identified as false or
> ignorable issues, but many are flagged as actual bugs and still more
> are as yet uninspected.

most are mostly false. And the rest is getting looked at. What's the
problem?

> Adrian Bunk has his list of known regressions and, I'll bet, also some
> patches in the trivial queue for small issues.

and all this fixing is happening AS WELL as new features. What makes you
think suddenly even more fixing will happen?

> There are many parts of the kernel that are not documented.

this is where the OSDL Documentation Person will help a lot; a full time
person.



> I'm sure most distributions have a bunch of bug fixing patches lying
> about that they could push.

I doubt it; most have gotten real good at avoiding getting a huge patch
backlog since that is just incredibly expensive ;)

> - A while back, akpm made some statements about being worried that the
> 2.6 kernel is getting buggier
> (http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6069363.html).

and at this years Kernel Summit actual data and general consensus showed
this was unfounded fear; the bugrates are more or less stable, but with
many more users.

> 
> - The need for the -stable tree and the (relatively large) number of
> -stable releases between each new major release clearly shows that we
> are leaving lots of regressions in our wake.

No it shows that bugs are getting fixed and delivered to you
IMMEDIATELY. Many many of the -stable things fixed are not in new
things. Is there anything in the -stable process that is not working for
you?





  reply	other threads:[~2006-11-08 22:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-11-08 22:09 Jesper Juhl
2006-11-08 22:22 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2006-11-08 22:40   ` Jesper Juhl
2006-11-08 23:05     ` Andreas Mohr
2006-11-08 23:54       ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-11-10 15:15     ` Pavel Machek
2006-11-10 15:48     ` Horst H. von Brand
2006-11-15 21:04       ` Jesper Juhl
2006-11-08 22:51   ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-09  9:26     ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-11-09  9:36       ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-09  9:52         ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-11-09 19:12           ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-09 19:21             ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-11-09 21:11               ` Adrian Bunk
2006-11-09 21:31                 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-11-09 23:56                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-11-10  0:18                     ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-10 17:45                     ` Stefan Richter
2006-11-11 11:00                     ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-11-08 23:28   ` Diego Calleja
2006-11-09  6:48     ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-11-09 12:45       ` Rolf Eike Beer
2006-11-09  4:57 Al Boldi
2006-11-09 17:05 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-11-10 15:52   ` Al Boldi
2006-11-10 16:16     ` Jesper Juhl
2006-11-10 16:42       ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-11-10 16:53         ` Randy Dunlap
2006-11-10 19:33           ` Al Boldi
2006-11-10 19:49             ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-11-10 21:22               ` Al Boldi
2006-11-10 21:31                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-11-11  4:15                   ` Al Boldi
2006-11-11  5:09                     ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-11-11  7:23                       ` David Miller
2006-11-11 11:15                         ` Al Boldi
2006-11-11  6:31                     ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-11-11 11:15                       ` Al Boldi
2006-11-11  7:15           ` Willy Tarreau
2006-11-11 12:03             ` Neil Brown
2006-11-11 19:16           ` Krzysztof Halasa
2006-11-11 19:15         ` Adrian Bunk

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1163024531.3138.406.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org \
    --to=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=jesper.juhl@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®