<OT> New kernels... new bugs... new problems... new woes...

[David A. Bandel]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2002 11:27:04 -0400
begin  Jerry McBride <mcbrides9 at comcast.net> spewed forth:

> 
> > "David A. Bandel" wrote:
> > > The UNSTABLE (x.ODD#.x) kernels are for kernel hackers.  Are you a
> > > kernel hacker?  Have you noticed the kernel doesn't use CVS?
> > 
> 
> 
> David you have a cold manner about you. Sorry if I pissed you off, but
> that's you.

Just the facts.  Sorry if you don't like the way I explain them.  And no,
I'm not in any way pissed of, irritated, whatever you attribute.

> 
> As for being a hacker... I've got the 2.5.10 kernel compiling like a
> gem. I must be doing something right. And if you re-read my postings, I
> suggest that these versions of 2.5.x should be kept under wraps in
> CVS... therefore I do know that these kernels aren't being kept in
> CVS...

Good.  Glad you got 2.5.x working.  Pls submit bug reports to LKML or the
specific developer.  They appreciate it.  Now, if your system blows up,
your dog gets fleas, etc., don't blame anyone but yourself (and you very
well may loose all your data playing in the unstable tree -- won't be the
first time that's happened).

Linus has _never_ used CVS and I very much doubt you'll convince him to do
so (especially just because you say so -- but don't let that stop you, go
ahead and tell him he's wrong, just be ready to be either ignored or
flamed).

> 
> Logic, my friend... logic...

No.  Read about how the Linux kernel tree works (stable vs
unstable/developmental).  This system was put in place over 10 years ago.

Ciao,

David A. Bandel
-- 
Focus on the dream, not the competition.
		-- Nemesis Racing Team motto