Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Andrew Morton on Kernel Hacking

Posted by Hemos on from the smart-people-often-say-smart-things dept.

Susie Denmark writes "Linux Format has a brief interview with Andrew Morton, the maintainer of the Linux kernel 2.6 tree. Andrew discusses the debates behind revision control systems (the BitKeeper and CVS), new kernel features and his own -mm tree. Will the issue of using RCSes in the kernel tree ever die down? Does it really matter?"

2 of 46 comments (clear)

  1. Great professionalism! by joib · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, uh, it seems that AM is a professional level headed guy. No surprises there really.

    But to my gripe: Starting the interview with "Do you think it was good to have had the time with BitKeeper in kernel development, or should they have stuck with CVS?". Gee, being so in tune with what's happening in kernel land just makes want to run to the nearest newsstand and get the latest "Linux Format": "The essential read for all Linux users".

  2. You What!! by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh. My. Gods. From TFA

    AM: Well, we never even used CVS. Before BitKeeper we basically weren't using anything - just a bunch of patches sitting on Linus' hard drive and it uploaded occasionally. We had no tracking of what had gone in the kernel at all.

    Someone, please tell me this is a dream. Wake me from this nightmare. Dear gods!! There was no version control on the Linux Kernel!? How? What? When? Where? Why? WTF!!?

    I am not rightly able to comprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that would provoke such a situation.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!