From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756895AbXFWRmh (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:42:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752397AbXFWRm3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:42:29 -0400 Received: from [212.12.190.23] ([212.12.190.23]:32963 "EHLO raad.intranet" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751191AbXFWRm2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:42:28 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: How innovative is Linux? Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 20:43:06 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706232043.06774.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: > > I'd argue the lack of a stable kernel internal API is also an innovation > Give me a break Alan; you are smarter than that! Arguing the validity of a stable Kernel internal API is as ridiculous as arguing the validity of the paperclip. The paperclip allows you to attach things to each other, no matter which version of paper you use. Please wake up! Thanks! -- Al