Stephen Clark wrote:
If hardware worked in the previous version of the kernel can't users expect
the same hardware to work in this kernel?
Failure of that assumption is the heart of the whole "regression"
discussion. It's not limited to hardware, kernel security might be an
issue, some network protocols might work faster and less reliably, etc.
Kernel behavior changes sometimes totally break user software which
makes unwarranted assumptions. That's not a regression, although users
may see it that way. When a change in fork() changed the
child-runs-first behavior, many programs broke, as was true with
threading changes. Bad reliability is the reward for bad code, but if a
kernel change makes that obvious some people think it's a regression.
--
Bill Davidsen <[email protected]>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
-
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]
