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

[Kurt Wall]

Scribbling feverishly on April 27, Jerry McBride managed to emit:
> I just grabbed a copy of kernel version 2.5.10 and thought I'd see how the
> progress has been. Prior to 2.5.10 I was running 2.5.7 on pretty much
> everything I own, aside from my personal lan server.
> 
> Anyways... it sucks. 

It being a development kernel, I can't say I'm surprised. You
shouldn't be, either. I follow l.k.m.l. pretty closely, so I know
that there's a good deal of code in flux in 2.5.x.

> I'm sure the efforts put into the new kernel tree are well worth the time.
> I mean after all, this will eventually end up being "TNG" and all... but
> WOW! There's something wrong when a humble guy, like my self, has to wade
> into the make files with a text editor and fix stupid syntax errors,
> misspellings and left behind garbage, before the damn thing will even
> begin to compile. Then there's those multiple modules that simply refuse
> to compile no matter how much error correcting is done...

This is precisely what I'd expect in a development kernel. Maybe it
works, maybe it doesn't. If it doesn't, fix it, submit a patch
against the latest code, and go back to testing. The FAQ says it so
much better than I can:

    2. What is an experimental kernel version?
       + (ADB) Linux kernel versions are divided in two series:
         experimental (odd series e.g. 1.3.xx or 2.1.x) and production
         (even series e.g. 1.2.xx, 2.0.xx or the forthcoming 2.2.x).
         The experimental series are fast moving versions which are
         used to test new features, algorithms, device drivers, etc.
         By their own nature the experimental kernels may behave in
         unpredictable ways, so one may experience data losses, random 
         machine lockups, etc.

> Is this progress?

Yup, but not for end users.

Kurt
-- 
Mencken and Nathan's Fifteenth Law of The Average American:
	The worst actress in the company is always the manager's wife.