From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262601AbTKDVDS (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2003 16:03:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262603AbTKDVDS (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2003 16:03:18 -0500 Received: from adsl-63-194-239-202.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net ([63.194.239.202]:1029 "EHLO mmp-linux.matchmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262601AbTKDVDN (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2003 16:03:13 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 13:03:10 -0800 From: Mike Fedyk To: Hans Reiser Cc: Stephan von Krawczynski , Herbert Xu , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Debian Kernels was: 2.6.0test9 Reiserfs boot time "buffer layer error at fs/buffer.c:431" Message-ID: <20031104210310.GA1068@matchmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: Hans Reiser , Stephan von Krawczynski , Herbert Xu , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20031029141931.6c4ebdb5.akpm@osdl.org> <20031101233354.1f566c80.akpm@osdl.org> <20031102092723.GA4964@gondor.apana.org.au> <20031102014011.09001c81.akpm@osdl.org> <20031102210942.GA9635@gondor.apana.org.au> <20031103112008.5ac6a6cc.skraw@ithnet.com> <3FA75F05.8070903@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3FA75F05.8070903@namesys.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Stephan von Krawczynski wrote: > >I really send prayers for the day distros will stop building own kernels > >for > >they only reduce the installed test base for kernels as a whole by > >splitting it > >up in numerous kernel versions... On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 12:10:45AM -0800, Hans Reiser wrote: > Amen. Since Debian is a not for profit organization, it really should > not be doing this. Ok guys, this has gotten pretty far OT. Being a debian user since Dec 1998 (first and only distro), I might be able to explain some things. Debian is not trying to relicense any GPLed code, but it does have another guide it follows as to what it will include in a Debian release; the DFSG - Debian Free Software Guide. Some licenses that are considered compatible with the GPL on LKML are not in the DFSG. I believe the latest one is the GNU Documentation License, but that's still being argued about... I have been using official Debian packages for everything except for the kernel. First because I wanted to test the -pre, -mm, -aa, and other kernels, and second that I didn't like the vesafb that was turned on by default. I'd love to see the 'initrd on cramfs' patch merged into the vanilla kernel though. :) Now, let's try to get it back On Topic... There was a bug in one of the released Debian kernels, and do you think this hasn't happened with Redhat, SuSe, or Mandrake? Just because Debian is completely OSS and maintained mostly by unpaid volunteers, that shouldn't keep them from having a seperate tree like everyone else. I'd like to see each vendor tree as small as possible. And Debian's may be the smallest vendor tree AFAIK they haven't merged XFS into their 2.4 tree. But think about this. Linus wants to see features have a large user base before merging many outside kernel projects, and vendor kernels are one way to show a project is popular. It's bad enough that there are over 5 other distros based on Debian, and only now are any of them contributing back to the installer, and maybe we will get some hardware detection out of Knoppix! So, has this bug been fixed? And if not, what other patches are needed to test more?