On Mar 14, 2005, at 7:39 AM, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2005-03-13 16:53, Bart Silverstrim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On the contrary, there are numerous cases when local patches, specific to the distribution of Linux that is used, are used:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-lvm/2002-November/msg00050.html
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2004-February/ msg00018.html
Backported fixes are not evil, but they are bad when they are available only if you are running "FooLinux version X".
Just for drivers? I wasn't sure what DM was...are any of these patches that were released available as source for other Linux kernels, or are these things being released without ever giving out the source to integrate with the primary Linux kernel tree?
But still, there is one source kernel, and unless the vendors did something proprietary (which I don't believe they're supposed to be allowed to do), you can compile your own kernel with your own set of enabled and disabled features from the Linux kernel source tree whether you're running Red Hat or Debian; it may break if that particular distro is depending on certain features as you have it configured and you fubar the new kernel's config, but it is still a matter of tweaking that configuration to get it working again.
Hardly. Configuration changes will never fix a driver that is only available as a patch to the kernel source tree, when the patch fails to apply, build or install correctly -- a common case with some drivers (i.e. Cisco VPN or SysKonnect).
You're right, if you have an application that requires modification to the kernel then config changes won't fix it. But that isn't the common case, and you should be able to take that application and apply it to the kernel tree source to create the working version, no? Or are they distro specific? In the few times I ran into it the "melding" wasn't distro-specific.
Let us put aside for a while the blatant error of considering three
distinct systems as one, when they are just that: three distinct systems
that just happen to share a lot of code and like cooperating on work
that is a benefit for all three.
Then it would best be summed up as a difference in opinion over operations management and organization management.
I can't download the sources for NetBSD's kernel, compile it on my FreeBSD box, and have it work no matter how much tweaking I do to the configuration...if I'm wrong, please someone correct me.
Actually, you can. The NetBSD folks state that only a system relatively
compliant with POSIX is required for cross-building NetBSD on a local,
non-NetBSD system:
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/BUILDING?rev=1.53&content- type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
(See the REQUIREMENTS section.)
No, I didn't mean compile it and deploy it. I mean replace my system's kernel with that kernel and have it work. The source trees are different, the resulting kernel would expect to work on a NetBSD *system*, not a FreeBSD system with a NetBSD kernel.
Redundancy is good from a survival perspective. Diversity is also good,
from an evolutionary perspective. For every bad thing Linus can say
about having separate teams working on the systems they enjoy working
with, we can probably come up with htwo reasons why this is good.
Again, it's a difference in organization and management opinion.
Hardly. Otherwise, it would be easy to point a browser to a single, central place and browse the history of the Linux kernel from 0.9.x to 1.x and then to 2.x. The fact that some bits are available in a proprietary repository somewhere is not good enough.
I was under the impression that kernel.org was the authoritative source for the Linux kernel. What people are doing on the side was their own project. *shrug* I could be wrong :-)
In general, it's a nice interview of Linus and very enjoyable to read, but I'm afraid he is not right about everything when he talks about the BSDs; which is not very surprising, I guess.
No, but don't discount editing of the interview as a factor too in accuracy.
But on the other hand, Linus doesn't really give a flip about BSD. He has his own project, and he does (justifiably) have a lot to be proud of (at the risk of inflating his ego more). He doesn't sound like he's really all that involved in distro flamewars or whatnot. So...it's just another article for people to read :-)
_______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
