From: Marc-Christian Petersen <m.c.p@wolk-project.de>
To: adefacc@tin.it, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Ruben Püttmann" <ruben@puettmann.net>,
"Alan Cox" <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Ville Herva" <vherva@niksula.hut.fi>
Subject: Re: linux-2.2 future?
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:42:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200308251815.20131.m.c.p@wolk-project.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3F468ABD.1EBAD831@tin.it>
On Friday 22 August 2003 23:27, A.D.F. wrote:
Hi A. De Faccio
> > I think 2.2 is not dead. I often see 2.2 kernels running on systems like
> > wlan access points or dsl routers from different vendors. 2.2 is often
> > used where stability is a must-have. At least security fixes have to go
> > in.
> I agree.
> > What do you think?
> Well, I think that 2.2.24 and 2.2.25 kernels are really stable (at least on
> UP), but that the most weak side is on IDE disk drivers.
My -secure tree is also rock solid on SMP :p
> They seem to have DMA problems when using recent hard disks (i.e. Maxtor,
> etc.) that lead to serious file system corruption problems.
> Maybe there are also geometry problems because all troubles have been
> observed on disks with more than 32 GB of capacity (i.e. 40 GB).
> This is a pity because, up to now, 2.2.x kernels have been
> a valid choice for small / semi-embedded systems 80x86
> (yes, I know that 2.4 should be better, but I'm still waiting for
> a stable rock kernel).
I agree on this. Therefore my 2.2-secure tree has a 2.4 IDE backport from the
PLD Project by Krzysiek Taraszka & Krzysiek Oledzki. It's not that up2date
like .21 and .22 IDE code is, but it works very very smooth and nice and rock
solid. We use the 2.2-secure tree for almost all customers in my company.
Biggest harddisk is a 160GB Maxtor IDE disk.
> In conclusion, I hope that next maintainer will think about
> these matters:
> IDE drivers;
ack!
> security fixes;
ack! Current 2.2 is missing, for example, hashing exploits in network stack,
like 2.4 had some time ago.
> micro-optimizations;
also done in 2.2-secure
> compatibility with newer compilers.
This might be the hardest job. This is not done in 2.2-secure. I think the
effort in doing this is not worth the time it takes.
> After all if 2.0 seems to be still alive also 2.2 should be.
I agree 100%. Anyway, no comment from Alan, so I think he don't want to give
2.2 away to me.
P.S.: I've cc'ed Ruben, Alan and Ville.
ciao, Marc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-25 16:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-22 21:27 linux-2.2 future? A.D.F.
2003-08-25 16:42 ` Marc-Christian Petersen [this message]
2003-08-26 15:03 ` Alan Cox
2003-08-27 22:27 ` Neale Banks
2003-08-27 22:40 ` Marc-Christian Petersen
[not found] <mzDG.3ry.27@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <mzWX.3MH.5@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <mV1t.7Wj.15@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-08-22 11:22 ` Ruben Puettmann
2003-08-22 17:46 ` Mike Fedyk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200308251815.20131.m.c.p@wolk-project.de \
--to=m.c.p@wolk-project.de \
--cc=adefacc@tin.it \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ruben@puettmann.net \
--cc=vherva@niksula.hut.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).