From: David Ford <david+challenge-response@blue-labs.org>
To: szonyi calin <caszonyi@yahoo.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: A users thoughts on the new dev. model
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 12:39:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41013F49.7030902@blue-labs.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040723152421.52282.qmail@web52904.mail.yahoo.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1740 bytes --]
This is malarkey, 99.9% pure FUD. I personally use just about every
kernel revision there is that is "newest", i.e. I use 2.4.x until 2.5
appears then I switch to 2.5.x. I may skip a few versions here and
there due to frequent releases or a known brown bag release. However by
far and large even the development or "unstable" line of releases as
some people have a bad habit of calling them, are far more reliable than
Windows.
I use odd.x releases even on my servers. Every once in a while there's
a significant bug in code that I'll have an issue with that can't be
worked around. So I avoid that version.
In short, your statement is pure bullsh*t, because there is very little
code put out that is actually a messy or unstable release. Most bugs
are quickly fixed, worked around, or avoided for that person because
that feature isn't really such a necessity. Linux (*nix) gives you a
LOT of ways to get a particular task done but people have this penchant
for finding a way that is broken and hyping/harping it up to make a big
issue out of it instead of just reporting the bug and getting the job
done in a different fashion.
"Oh my gawd it's a bug, let me piss on everyone's doorstep and make
caustic remarks on LKML about horribly broken code. Never mind you that
I can probably get it done another way."
Give the developers a little credit, we all make mistakes; they happen
to fix theirs pretty fast and they're downright honest about fessing up
to them.
David
>>From the LWM story i understood that linux will be like windows:
>lots of "features" but no stability, except if you use a
> distribution kernel. And that seriously made me think about
> using another free *nix for a stable system.
>
[-- Attachment #2: david+challenge-response.vcf --]
[-- Type: text/x-vcard, Size: 183 bytes --]
begin:vcard
fn:David Ford
n:Ford;David
email;internet:david@blue-labs.org
title:Industrial Geek
tel;home:Ask please
tel;cell:(203) 650-3611
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
end:vcard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-23 16:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-07-22 15:04 Evan Hisey
2004-07-22 22:25 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-07-23 13:58 ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-07-23 15:24 ` szonyi calin
2004-07-23 16:39 ` David Ford [this message]
2004-07-23 19:06 ` Xiong Jiang
2004-07-23 20:00 ` Tim Wright
2004-07-23 21:40 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-07-23 23:04 ` hpa
2004-07-24 10:38 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-07-27 20:08 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-07-22 22:57 ` Paul Jackson
2004-07-27 20:20 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-07-28 7:31 ` Paul Jackson
2004-07-23 19:32 ` Florin Andrei
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=41013F49.7030902@blue-labs.org \
--to=david+challenge-response@blue-labs.org \
--cc=caszonyi@yahoo.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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®