On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:59:02 -0300 Jorge Morais <please.no.spam.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It's still a way to check out these new features hands-on :) > > It's a kernel. Exactly. That's definitely one of the thing you have to know about, especially if this one's got some unpredictable stuff in it. > Even if it already released, it has a higher chance of bugs than a > more established kernel. Agreed, but from my experience, it's more like 'features' with kernel - some stuff just change, and most of this isn't quite obvious from release info, even with such commit-by-commit teardown like kernelnewbies. http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_29 > Waiting for the package to become stable on Gentoo is not just about > ebuild bugs; it is also about waiting for enough users in general to > test the upstream package, and Gentoo users in particular to test the > package within Gentoo. There's a race condition and quite unpredictable dependency :) > Of course, if you want to actively help, that is a reason to test > the latest software... but I am afraid that a kernel bug could lead > to unpredictable behavior, data loss and other problems I can't > tolerate. Also, I think a kernel has a higher chance of hidden > bugs (bugs that don't stand in your face). But that's fine with desktop systems, especially if you have full net backup as a daily cronjob (which is a great idea, btw). I tend to use each new kernel for at least a few weeks, before deploying it anywhere, and no bugreports or security advisory papers are substitute for that. But this isn't really a discussion, since I certainly don't speak for production systems and you probably mean just a general deployment everywhere, so everyone's right in their own way. Besides, stability vs innovation is too much a matter of personal preference to discuss it w/o starting an endless holywar. -- Mike Kazantsev // fraggod.net
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
