| 1 |
On 01/14/14 12:37 AM, Greg KH wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 04:15:37PM +0700, "C. Bergström" wrote: |
| 3 |
>> At the end of the day we have one codebase which is "engineered" and |
| 4 |
>> another which has "evolved". |
| 5 |
> I'll take an "evolved" codebase over "engineered" anyday. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> You do realize that is exactly why Linux has succeeded, right? The |
| 8 |
> kernel has evolved, and was never "engineered". There's lots people |
| 9 |
> should be learning from biology... |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> So you are using the benifits of evolution right now on your system, |
| 12 |
> don't knock it, it's proven to work. |
| 13 |
I'll bite - While I don't think nature stopped to properly design |
| 14 |
interfaces along the way. I bet you Linus wouldn't agree with your |
| 15 |
comment very much. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
1) I expect quite a bit of time has gone into (Solaris and Linux) kernel |
| 18 |
interfaces |
| 19 |
2) Any larger or invasive changes require quite a bit of planning, |
| 20 |
review and testing. (Possibly with tests (public/private) to cover a |
| 21 |
large amount of the new/existing feature |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
To clarify - by engineering I mean significant forethought into the |
| 24 |
design and implementation. I'm not trying to take away the achievements |
| 25 |
of any particular piece of software. In this case it just one of those |
| 26 |
"you know it when you see it". If I wasn't clear or you don't understand |
| 27 |
what I meant - that's ok because I meant no offense to anyone. |
Archives