Vanishing Features Of The 2.6 Kernel

chromatic writes "Jerry Cooperstein has written an excellent article summarizing the features removed from the upcoming 2.6 kernel. One controversial change may be tightening restrictions on binary-only modules." And Lovechild writes with some more 2.6 news: "I recently did an inteview with famous kernel hacker extraordinare and all round nice guy Robert M. Love for Tinyminds.org, about kernel 2.6 and what can be expected for desktop Linux users, when the new kernel series is released.

Comments

Re:Arrogance

[rossz]

At first I was going to point out that you missed my point entirely, but then I realized you just reinforced my statement. Are you, by chance, a kernel hacker?

Re:Arrogance

[rossz]

I'm not a troll. Nor am an an anonymous coward fuckwad. At least I have the balls to make a statement (right or wrong) with my name attached to it.

Oh, and in case you are too stupid to figure it out, this one IS a troll.

Re:Binary modules

[bsharitt]

Yeah, my stupid Lexmark printer doesn't work under Linux since the drivers are binary only x86. Luckily I still have Mac OS X to do my real work with, and I use Linux just to play around with.

Re:Perhaps now

[The Bungi]

*chuckle* So now it's bad that they maintain backwards compatibility?

The fact that Linux kernel changes the APIs often and does not have backward compatibility is is well-compensated by the fact that all the interface changes are completely transparent and has the advantage of preventing drivers bit rot

You lost me there. "Transparent" usually means "continues to be compatible". So are they compatible or not?

Re:Binary modules

[vrmlguy]

Presumption of guilt does not imply bad code, it implies prejudice(*).

(*) Please don't flame me for calling Linus a racist.

What's wrong with you that you assume that you're going to be flamed for using a word correctly? Do you think that most slashdot readers are too niggardly to own a dictionary?