On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 11:29 +0100, Prakash Punnoor wrote: > A gentoo view: There are lots of patchsets floating around in the gentoo forum > based on either vanilla or mm-kernel, but over the months something has > changed: Previously most patchsets were based on mm, but now are based on > vanilla. Why? Very simple: mm became too unstable. I used to go with a mm > based kernel just for fun, but it changed as one kernel had some serious > issues with reiserfs - and it is really not fun to lose data. (At least I read > about it, before testing that kernel.) Since then i never touched a mm-kernel > again, in fact now I even feel scared to put on a vanilla-rc kernel. I do it, > but I feel like when I use a "stable" mm-kernel from earlier times... > > So if you wantpeople to test kernels, they shouldn't be too unstable...
Thanks, it's about time someone said this. We had a preview of what it would be like if "more users tested -mm" when Ingo's realtime preempt patches were based on it, so the audio oriented distros briefly shipped -mm kernels. It was a nightmare. Most people (icluding myself) experienced daily lockups. When Ingo rebased the RT patch against mainline there was muich rejoicing on LAU. -mm is just too unstable for anyone but kernel hackers to run. Anyone who tells you otherwise is smoking something. Lee - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
