Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Slightly OT but interesting nonetheless...

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Am Dienstag 27 September 2011, 13:07:02 schrieb Michael Mol:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
>
> <volkerarmin@××××××××××.com> wrote:
> > Am Dienstag 27 September 2011, 04:05:31 schrieb Grant Edwards:
> >> That sounds good, but in practice it doesn't work.
> >>
> >>  1) The kernel developers don't support any existing customers.  Bugs
> >>     are only fixed for customers who are willing to run the next
> >>     kernel verison.  I've got customers that are still running 2.4
> >>     kernels. 2.6.18 is still widely used.  Will the kernel developers
> >>     add new features, support for new hardware, or fix bugs for those
> >>     customers.  Not a chance.
> >
> > so what? There are long term stable kernels with no api changes. Hmm...
>
> Except they have drivers which are buggy and require backported fixes.

and that is the reason stable series exist. They are stable and they backport 
fixes. Exclusively.

>
> >>  2) The kernel developers only make sure that drivers compile.  They
> >>     don't have the hardware or knowlege required to actually test
> >>     them.  One of our drivers _is_ in the kernel.  Sure, it builds,
> >>     but AFAIK, it hasn't actually worked for at least 10 years.
> >
> > and nobody complains on lkml about it - seems that nobody uses your
> > hardware.
> Except his customers. Who are going directly to him for support.
>
> > If something stops working (called a 'regression' btw) it has to be
> > fixed. Linus is very clear about that.
>
> That's all well and good, but it doesn't fix things that weren't
> working correctly in the first place. Upstream kernel doesn't backport
> fixes, that's what distros and people like Grant, for their customers.

wrong, long time stable series do backport fixes. That is the reason they 
exist in the first place.

>
> And Linus's statement as quoted in that article (and my snippet)
> doesn't include one important caveat: Sometimes, they drop support for
> things that either have no maintainer, or are obsolete and difficult
> to keep.

and when they do that they warn everybody for years (just look up binary 
sysctl support as a prime example).

>
> >> Trying to maintain two drivers (one in-kernel and one out-of-kernel)
> >> just creates twice as much work for no gain.
> >
> > then don't be outside the kernel.
>
> If we take your position, in this context, to its logical outcome, it
> sounds like you're saying that distributions like Gentoo, Red Hat and
> Debian shouldn't maintain older kernels with backported fixes.

no, but if you decide on one kernel you should use one of the long term 
supported one. Not 2.6.something-because-I-like-the-number.

>
> There exist systems which cannot be upgraded with financial sanity;
> the existing install works well enough that it would cost more to
> upgrade.

so don't touch the kernel. Wow, that was hard. I think I need something to eat 
now. Hmmm... noodles....

> The reasons might be that they're using an old software
> package which was abandoned, and taking ownership of the code isn't
> always sane. I was actually approached by someone in my area a couple
> weeks ago who was in just this kind of scenario.

and if the system just works - why touch it at all?

-- 
#163933