2.3.51 tulip broken

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> For those not interested what superficially appears to be a kernel power
> grab, there are issue underlying all of what appears to be a personal
> conflict.
> 
>   1) Should the kernel source code interfaces, for well-understood
>      interfaces, be stable?  (We are solidly committed not having a binary
>      interface, so bringing that up is a red herring.)
> 
>   2a) Given that development kernels are frequently unstable in some
>     unexpected way, is is reasonable force testing of driver changes
>     combined with unknown other changes?

I think so. Anyways, it worked with usb, and it seems to be the only
way to stay in sync with kernel development.

>   2b) Given that the kernel continues to exponentially increasing in size,
>     should all development go through the latest development kernel?

Is that really a problem? (My kernel _still_ compiles in 10
minutes. Granted, it used to compile in ten minutes on p/233, now it
is ten minutes on celeron/300 :-)))
								Pavel
-- 
I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents me at discuss@linmodems.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send a message body containing "unsubscribe"
to linux-tulip-request@beowulf.org