On 1/20/06, Michael Loftis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> --On January 20, 2006 9:20:19 PM +0100 Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > On 1/20/06, Michael Loftis <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> > [snip]
> >> I'm trying to think of a way to relate this better but I just can't.
> >> What's needed is a 'target' for incremental updates, things like minor
> >> changes, bugfixes, etc. I feel like supporting entirely new hardware
> >
> > That's called a vendor kernel.
> > You pay the vendor money, the vendor maintains a stable (as in feature
> > frozen) kernel, backports bugfixes for you etc.
> > Take a look at the RedHat and SuSE enterprise kernels, they seem to be
> > what you want.
>
...
> RH is trying to be everything, which is fine for them and their intended audience. I've never
> really been happy with their kernels, nor with their base os. Many are
> though.
>
> Why can't a community do this though? I guess the answer is there's no
> reason a community cant, jsut the mainline developers are not going to,
> because it's too much work.
>
...
>
> I think stable should also include bugfixes and updates without having to
> take (potentially, if not certainly) incompatible changes along with that.
Are you volunteering?
--
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
