In message <199902032316.SAA17215@dcl>, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" writes:
+-----
| This message didn't get sent to the linux-kernel list due to an
| addressing typo, so I'm taking the liberty of forwarding it. The
| message here is *important*, and *timely*, especially now that 2.2 has
| been released.
|
| I'd hate to see MIT turn away from Linux to NetBSD, but more
| importantly, if we keep being gratuitous about changing interfaces, it
| will be more than just MIT that will give up on Linux.
+--->8
<quoted message omitted>
I'm going to second this message on behalf of CMU Electrical & Computer
Engineering, and I suspect I speak for the School of Computer Science as
well (they're still trying to stabilize their i386_linux3 --- yes,
substantially the same one as described for MIT, as is our i386_linux2g
which predates the naming convention; see warlord@mit.edu's message as to
why).
Linux is *not* interface-stable. Not as it is needed in the real world.
If the "free software" mantra is going to take priority over usability,
quite a few of us current Linux users are going to have to look for a
supportable OS.
--
brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] allbery@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator [WAY too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu
carnegie mellon / electrical and computer engineering KF8NH
We are Linux. Resistance is an indication that you missed the point.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/