>> By stable I mean rate of change of codebase, patch volume per month,
>> 2.6 is orders of magnitude less stable than 2.4 by that simple measure.
>
>That is no measure of stability.
>
Ack! Let's pick one:
Although the exact numbers of patches per time for a specific
software manufacturer - let's pick Microsoft as an example - is not known,
it is usually low (two for this *month* afaics), compared to what hits lkml
*each day*.
Does that make their software more stable than Linux? I would have my
doubts about that.
Jan Engelhardt
--
-
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]
