Re: Zen kernel, what are advantages if any?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 12:53 -0800, Don Quixote de la Mancha wrote:

> I know from my own experience, that if I were in the middle of a big
> coding project, and my eggs were served sunny side up at breakfast
> rather than over easy, then my head would surely explode.
> 
> I expect that the kernel.org developers all face much the same kind of problem.

I am not a kernel developer, but I know a little about this indirectly.
Whether a project gets accepted into mainline depends on a lot of
things, but one of the big ones is how intrusive it is. If it requires
changes to many drivers and many places in the kernel, it is much more
difficult to get it merged into mainline. This is why, for instance, the
Xen hypervisor is still not part of the mainline even though it has been
used in production in many places for years (and is officially supported
in Red Hat Enterprise). Conversely, the KVM hypervisor is part of
mainline already, even though (in my experience) it is not nearly as
robust as Xen. But KVM is a much less intrusive set of patches so it was
much easier to get it merged.

--Greg




--Greg


-- 
users mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux