From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261593AbVADNAc (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2005 08:00:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261599AbVADNAc (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2005 08:00:32 -0500 Received: from smtpout.mac.com ([17.250.248.45]:55753 "EHLO smtpout.mac.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261593AbVADNAX (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2005 08:00:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: <200501032059.j03KxOEB004666@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> <0F9DCB4E-5DD1-11D9-892B-000D9352858E@mac.com> <5B2E0ED4-5DD3-11D9-892B-000D9352858E@mac.com> <20050103221441.GA26732@infradead.org> <20050104054649.GC7048@alpha.home.local> <20050104063622.GB26051@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <9F909072-5E3A-11D9-A816-000D9352858E@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <85546E06-5E50-11D9-A816-000D9352858E@mac.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Adrian Bunk , Willy Tarreau , Al Viro , William Lee Irwin III , William Lee Irwin III , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Andries Brouwer , Horst von Brand , Maciej Soltysiak From: Felipe Alfaro Solana Subject: Re: starting with 2.7 Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:59:51 +0100 To: Rik van Riel X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 4 Jan 2005, at 13:36, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: > >> I don't pretend that kernel interfaces stay written in stone, for >> ages. What I would like is that, at least, those interfaces were >> stable enough, let's say for a few months for a stable kernel series, >> so I don't have to keep bothering my propietary VMWare vendor to fix >> the problems for me, since the > > How much work are you willing to do to make this happen ? ;) As much as needed :-) > It would be easy enough for you to take 2.6.9 and add only > security fixes and critical bugfixes to it for the next 6 > months - that would give your binary vendors a stable > source base to work with... I would... if it was easy enough to find some form of a security patches pool. It's usually difficult to find a site where I can download security patches for older versions of vanilla kernels. I have the feeling that this security fixes go mainstream onto the latest kernel versions, leaving users in hands of their distribution (either to upgrade to a new distribution kernel, or waiting for the distribution vendor to backport). Thus, sometimes people are forced to upgrade to a new kernel version as such security patches either don't exist for older kernel versions, are difficult to find, or need backporting (and I'm not knowledgeable enough to backport nearly half of them), and since the new kernel version introduces new features -- which sometimes do break existing propietary software -- users starts complaining. However, it's true that distributions, like Red Hat or Fedora, try at its best to keep the kernel as stable as possible. For example, FC3 seems to sport something like a 2.6.9 kernel, but sometimes those kernels are so heavily patched that some closed-source software doesn't work. I know I can choose open software and hardware vendors compatible with Linux, but sometimes I cannot. I like VMware, and I use it a lot. I'm not willing to sacrifice it, and that's the reason I think 2.6 must fork as soon as possible into 2.7.