| 1 |
Daniel Drake wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>Omkhar Arasaratnam wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>>That said, we're not RedHat. We ship as MANY features as we can and let |
| 7 |
>>the user decide. I agree that it is valuable to get reiser4 testing done |
| 8 |
>>up front. Eventually - some people will use it. Last I checked "I think |
| 9 |
>>$FOO is stupid" wasn't a valid closure code in bugzilla ;-) |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
>Then you have different views from the kernel project :) |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
>We and try and make our kernel (gentoo-sources) _more_ stable than the |
| 16 |
>official Linux releases. We mainly stick to bug fixes decreed worthy by the |
| 17 |
>upstream developers, etc. We never include patches when we know of problems |
| 18 |
>that they will introduce. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
>Daniel |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
Sorry I was unclear - what I meant was that we wouldn't remove all |
| 24 |
support for an fs from portage. As an example if/when reiserfs4 merges |
| 25 |
into mainline we wouldn't be ripping out all the userland support and |
| 26 |
vanilla-kernel support. You are completely correct regarding |
| 27 |
gentoo-sources, though I don't believe this was the point of the |
| 28 |
original discussion. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Omkhar Arasaratnam - Gentoo PPC64 Developer |
| 34 |
omkhar@g.o - http://dev.gentoo.org/~omkhar |
| 35 |
Gentoo Linux / PPC64 Linux: http://ppc64.gentoo.org |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives