| 1 |
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:42:00AM +0700, "C. Bergström" wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 01/14/14 12:37 AM, Greg KH wrote: |
| 3 |
> >On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 04:15:37PM +0700, "C. Bergström" wrote: |
| 4 |
> >>At the end of the day we have one codebase which is "engineered" and |
| 5 |
> >>another which has "evolved". |
| 6 |
> >I'll take an "evolved" codebase over "engineered" anyday. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> >You do realize that is exactly why Linux has succeeded, right? The |
| 9 |
> >kernel has evolved, and was never "engineered". There's lots people |
| 10 |
> >should be learning from biology... |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> >So you are using the benifits of evolution right now on your system, |
| 13 |
> >don't knock it, it's proven to work. |
| 14 |
> I'll bite - While I don't think nature stopped to properly design interfaces |
| 15 |
> along the way. I bet you Linus wouldn't agree with your comment very much. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I don't think you have been paying attention much, I'm directly quoting |
| 18 |
Linus: |
| 19 |
"Linux is evolution, not intelligent design" - Linus |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
There are many more statements exactly like this from him over the |
| 22 |
years, do a bit of research to dig them up. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> 1) I expect quite a bit of time has gone into (Solaris and Linux) kernel |
| 25 |
> interfaces |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Time doesn't mean they haven't evolved. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> 2) Any larger or invasive changes require quite a bit of planning, review |
| 30 |
> and testing. (Possibly with tests (public/private) to cover a large amount |
| 31 |
> of the new/existing feature |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
And we always get it wrong, so they evolve into something that later on |
| 34 |
works. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Seriously, this is how the very system you are using has been created, |
| 37 |
it's a well-documented fact (look at our changelogs for details.) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
sorry, |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
greg k-h |
Archives