Slashdot Mirror
Talking With 2.0 Kernel Maintainer David Weinehall
Jeremy Andrews writes "While the recently released 2.6 Linux kernel is all the rage these days, the much older 2.0 kernel is still alive and kicking. KernelTrap has interviewed David Weinehall, the maintainer of the 2.0 Linux kernel. David became the 2.0 maintainer in December of 1999, after Alan Cox moved on to work full time on the 2.2 kernel. In this interview David talks about what's involved in maintaining the 2.0 kernel, who uses it, when we can expect the impending release of 2.0.40, why you should upgrade (if you're still running 2.0.39), and more."
Still maintaining the 1.0 kernel? :)
This space is not for rent.
Not many people realize that a lot of us in the aerospace community rely on older versions of the kernel due to its "nimbleness" for fly-by-wire systems, etc. A lot of us don't need the newer features of more recent kernels, and having something that does the bare minimum--fast-- is optimal.
We really have to be thankful that people maintain the older versions!
I've got at least a dozen production machines which have been going since Slackware 3.6, so I'm very glad to see the 2.0 kernels still being 'overseen' by someone.
The hardware is old, it works with the 2.0.x kernels, it works fast and without issues (except for exploits of course), so why bother making a radical change which might end up breaking more by moving to the latest.
after reading his interview, it seems to me as if there are still fairly frequent problems with 2.0 relating to stability and potential security problems.
I don't recall hearing about these problems all that often with the newer 2.4; is it just my perception, or are the new kernels more soundly written than the older ones?
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
If a kernel maintainer can't find a programming job then the programming profession is pretty much destroyed already.
I do have an IT-related job in Sweden, and occationally we actually employ new people.
We (my company, I dont personally recruit people) are not looking for the most brilliant and ambitious people out there. We employ those who have exactly the right level of skills. Sounds strange, but when the times changes, if you have employed over-qualified people they will demand higher salaries, more interesting duties, and maybe they will leave nevertheless. Being overqualified is as bad as being underqualified.
Unfortunately, these days companies are not working with new cool upstart projects that they need smart entrepreneurs and geeks for - they rather work with streamlining their (organisational) processes, and maintanance.
Also, they dont want to really employ someone (if they do, they see it as a strategic decision). The rather hire a consultant or "Manpower"-guy. (This might primarily be true for Sweden).
I am not saying erasing merits from your CV will increase your chances, but the fact that someone else with more skills do not get a job does not automatically imply you wont.
Work experience is always valuable though (unless perhaps you are 55+).