Re: Linux 2.4 future

From: Max Valdez
Date: Sat Dec 06 2003 - 10:47:55 EST

The nices thing is that the evolution from 2.6.0 to 2.6.8 will be very
fast :-), what are the predictions? mine is less than 6 months, we begin
with a nice kernel, not the best, but will finish those 6 months with a
great kernel, really stable, the the release pace will be slower, and we
can start to think on the new shiny unstable 2.7.x kernel :-)

On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 09:33, John Jasen wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Jan Rychter wrote:
> > >>>>> "Marcelo" == Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Marcelo> The intention of this email is to clarify my position on 2.4.x
> > Marcelo> future.
> >
> > Marcelo> 2.6 is becoming more stable each day, and we will hopefully
> > Marcelo> see a 2.6.0 release during this month or January.
> I would argue that 2.2 wasn't really usable until somewhere around 2.2.12.
> I would also claim that 2.4 wasn't useful until 2.4.10.
> If we continue to improve along these lines, can I expect 2.6 to be
> generally usable somewhere around 2.6.8? :)
> > On my notebook, I have spent the last two years going through regular
> > painful kernel patching and upgrades.
> <snip>
> His experiences pretty much mirror my own -- ACPI has been an adventure,
> cpufreq occasionally didn't work, full USB doesn't work without ACPI, I
> need alsa drivers and ACPI in order to have acceptable sound, and I need
> to use GATOS drivers for my display, else 3d just blows chunks.
> For the longest time on this beast, kernel upgrades were a day long
> adventure.
> First, to push in acpi, cpufreq, and freeswan. (Oh, look, is
> out ... but the latest ACPI patch was and CPUfreq is
> ... time to patch and resolve
> rejections!)
> Then it was off to put in alsa, radoen, freeswan, linux-wlan-ng and so
> forth ...
> Some things should be migrated in and updated. drm modules, for example. I
> would also vote for alsa being merged. ACPI was brought up to date in
> 2.4.22, I believe, but I haven't checked since then. It should also be
> relativelt current, IMHO.
> > 1) Please don't stop working (and that does include pulling in new
> > stuff) on 2.4, as many people still have to use it.
> >
> > 2) Please don't start developing 2.7 too soon. Go for at least 6
> > months of bug-fixing. During that time, patches with new features
> > will accumulate anyway, so it isn't lost time. But it will at least
> > prevent people from saying "well, I use 2.7.45 and it works for
> > me".
> I have to agree with both of these points. 2.6.0 will probably have
> problems that will take a while to sort out. Putting it on systems to test
> is one thing, putting it into production as its the only blessed solution
> is another ...
Linux garaged 2.4.22-ac4 #2 SMP Mon Oct 6 14:33:25 UTC 2003 i686 Pentium III (Coppermine) GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
Version: 3.1
GS/ d-s:a-28C++ILHA+++P+L++>+++E---W++N*o--K-w++++O-M--V--PS+PEY--PGP++t5XRtv++b++DI--D-G++e++h-r+y**

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part