Re: 2.0.31 : please!
david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
14 Jul 1997 12:50:35 -0700
In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.3.95.970713235806.600E-100000@inorganic5.fdt.net>,
Jon Lewis <jlewis@inorganic5.fdt.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Jul 1997, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
>> Seriously - it appears that a critical mass of developers has decided
>> that a stable, working kernel isn't worth the bother. I find this
>> highly troubling. Anybody want to bet that 2.2 will be left in a fairly
>> unusable state too, while the developers start out on 2.4?
>
>If you want faster kernel updates, hire some kernel hackers and make them
>code. Is there a single kernel hacker being paid explicitly to work on
>the Linux kernel?
Well, there are two (plus myself, who maybe counts as 1/10th of a
kernel hacker) working for McAfee Associates. Not very much of this
code has made its way back into the baseline kernel, though (the
enhanced memory detection code is the only thing I can think of,
because all the other code is written either against 1.2.13 or
2.0.28.) None of us are touching anything newer than 2.0.28 with
anything less than a 3 meter pole, though.
____
david parsons \bi/ Some of the code is at http://www.pell.chi.il.us/~orc
\/