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?
next prev parent 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®