mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Segaud <matt@minas-morgul.org>
To: Paolo Ciarrocchi <paolo.ciarrocchi@gmail.com>
Cc: Massimo Cetra <mcetra@navynet.it>, Ed Tomlinson <edt@aei.ca>,
	Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com>,
	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: My thoughts on the "new development model"
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 21:03:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877jpdcnf5.fsf@barad-dur.crans.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4d8e3fd3041026050823d012dc@mail.gmail.com> (Paolo Ciarrocchi's message of "Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:08:36 +0200")

Paolo Ciarrocchi <paolo.ciarrocchi@gmail.com> disait dernièrement que :
 
>> To my mind, we only need to make clear that a stable kernel is a stable
>> kernel.
>> Not a kernel for experiments.
>
> 2.6 is not an experimental kernel. Not at all.

clearly do I agree.
  
>> To my mind, stock 2.6 kernels are nice for nerds trying patches and
>> willing to recompile their kernel once a day. They are not suitable for
>> servers. Several times on testing machines, switching from a 2.6 to the
>> next one has caused bugs on PCI, acpi, networking and so on.
>
> I don't understand what you mean here. 
> Did you report these problems to lkml ?
> It's the firts time I heard about this kind of problems.

I will just add this:
we, young students from all horizons here at the ENS Cachan, run a huge network
(~900 hosts), with 4 important servers, all running 2.6. And my conclusion, as
I cannot speak for my fellow colleagues but think most would agree, is that
these servers behave *a* *lot* *better* since we switch. We had problems first
but they were mostly due to the switch to Debian testing distribution (from
old Woody).
Also we have a 4-way (bi-Xeon with HT) running 2.6.7, playing proxy squid to
serve our entire network, up since 131 days, with no problems; and the 2.6.x
switch was more a blessing than a pain in the butt, since 2.4.x just let him
play more and more in system time.... Thanks to sched domains and _real_ HT
scheduling support.

And these are production servers, no more no less.
  
>> The direction is lost. How many patchsets for vanilla kernel exist?
>
> It was the same for 2.4. And that's not _BAD_, is _GOOD_.

yup -mm, -ac existed in 2.4 series.
and do not forget that -mm series are a stage for patches aiming mainline,
not a special patchset among others.

>> Someone has decided that linux must go on desktops as well and
>> developing new magnificent features for desktop users is causing serious
>> problems to the ones who use linux at work on production servers.
>
> Who ?

Users decided, I guess :)
  
>> 2.4 tree is still the best solution for production.

I do not think so, I think it depends on the hardware you bear.

>> 2.6 tree is great for gentoo users who like gcc consuming all CPU
>> (maxumum respect to gentoo but I prefer debian)

huh ? what's the point ????
Our 2.6 servers run Debian testing with a little trouble.

Best regards, and hurray for Linux 2.6 series !!

Mathieu

-- 
"One of the great things about books is sometimes there are some fantastic
pictures."

George W. Bush
January 3, 2000
Quoted in U.S. News & World Report.


  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-26 19:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 115+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-26  5:40 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-26 10:44 ` Ed Tomlinson
2004-10-26 11:09   ` Massimo Cetra
2004-10-26 12:08     ` Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-26 19:03       ` Mathieu Segaud [this message]
2004-10-26 20:16         ` Let's make a small change to the process Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-26 20:22           ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 20:26             ` Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-26 20:33               ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 20:36           ` Dave Jones
2004-10-26 20:44             ` Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-27  0:51               ` Jan Knutar
2004-10-26 20:48           ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-26 21:00             ` Paolo Ciarrocchi
2004-10-26 15:03     ` My thoughts on the "new development model" William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 21:19     ` Ed Tomlinson
2004-10-27  3:05       ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-27  4:29         ` Rik van Riel
2004-10-27  5:13           ` Willy Tarreau
2004-10-27  5:23             ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27  6:04               ` Willy Tarreau
2004-10-27  6:28                 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27  6:50                   ` Massimo Cetra
2004-10-27  6:56                     ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-11-16 16:43                     ` Bill Davidsen
2004-10-27 13:48               ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27 14:57                 ` Theodore Ts'o
2004-10-27 15:35                   ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27 19:46                     ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-27 21:08                       ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27 21:14                         ` Rik van Riel
2004-10-27 17:55                   ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 13:38             ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27  5:25         ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-28  6:46           ` michael
2004-10-28  7:13             ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-28  7:28             ` Hacksaw
2004-10-29 21:30               ` Adrian Bunk
2004-10-28  7:57             ` Massimo Cetra
2004-10-28 16:14             ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-28 17:27               ` Theodore Ts'o
2004-10-28 23:19               ` michael
2004-10-29  0:02                 ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-27  4:26       ` Rik van Riel
2004-11-16 16:18       ` Bill Davidsen
2004-10-26 12:37   ` Barry K. Nathan
2004-10-26 14:40     ` Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-26 14:28   ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 14:41   ` Gene Heskett
2004-10-26 14:24 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 15:27 ` Alan Cox
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-10-28 23:33 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-28 23:53 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-28 13:04 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-28 13:15 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-10-28 15:03 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-28 15:07   ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-28 17:33   ` Alan Cox
2004-10-28 18:39     ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-29 13:19   ` Bill Davidsen
2004-10-29 17:49     ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27 19:50 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-27 21:40 ` Alan Cox
2004-10-28  2:59   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2004-10-28 10:16     ` Alan Cox
2004-10-27  0:00 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-27  0:24 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2004-10-27  0:36   ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27  0:36 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27  2:45   ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-27  3:19     ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-27  2:47 ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-26 16:32 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-26 17:37 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 15:54 Chuck Ebbert
2004-10-26 17:50 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-22 20:03 My thoughts on the "new development model"(A bit late tho) Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-22 21:52 ` My thoughts on the "new development model" Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-22 22:12   ` Clemens Schwaighofer
2004-10-23 12:55     ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2004-10-24  3:04       ` Clemens Schwaighofer
2004-10-22 22:45   ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-22 22:50     ` Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-22 23:21       ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-23  0:41       ` Lee Revell
2004-10-22 22:57   ` Willy Tarreau
2004-10-23  0:09     ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-23  2:40       ` Lee Revell
2004-10-25 21:15       ` Bill Davidsen
2004-10-25 22:08         ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-26 16:12         ` Charles Shannon Hendrix
2004-10-26 16:53           ` Mark Nipper
2004-10-23  1:40     ` Adrian Bunk
2004-10-23  5:04       ` Greg KH
2004-10-26  1:07         ` Adrian Bunk
2004-10-23  5:52       ` Willy Tarreau
2004-10-23 14:18         ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-23 19:58       ` Kronos
2004-10-23 20:05         ` Espen Fjellvær Olsen
2004-10-22 22:58   ` Lee Revell
2004-10-22 23:21     ` Paul Fulghum
2004-10-22 23:43     ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-10-23  8:01     ` Boris Bukowski
2004-10-26 16:01   ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-26 16:44     ` John Richard Moser
2004-10-26 16:58       ` Hua Zhong
2004-10-26 18:53         ` Diego Calleja
2004-10-26 19:33           ` Paul Fulghum
2004-10-27 15:31             ` Alan Cox
2004-10-27 15:30         ` Alan Cox
2004-10-27 18:37           ` Hua Zhong
2004-10-27 21:39             ` Alan Cox
2004-10-27 16:59         ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-10-27 19:27           ` Marcos D. Marado Torres
2004-10-26 18:01     ` Stephen Hemminger
2004-10-26 18:38       ` John Richard Moser

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=877jpdcnf5.fsf@barad-dur.crans.org \
    --to=matt@minas-morgul.org \
    --cc=76306.1226@compuserve.com \
    --cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
    --cc=edt@aei.ca \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcetra@navynet.it \
    --cc=paolo.ciarrocchi@gmail.com \
    --cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
    /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

Powered by JetHome