Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

2.6 Linux Kernel in Need of an Overhaul?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the get-it-right-this-time dept.

toadlife writes "ZDNet UK reports that Andrew Morton, the head maintainer of the Linux production kernel, is concerned about the amount of bugs in the 2.6 kernel. He is considering the possibility of dedicating an entire release cycle to fixing long standing bugs." From the article: "One problem is that few developers are motivated to work on bugs, according to Morton. This is particularly a problem for bugs that affect old computers or peripherals, as kernel developers working for corporations don't tend to care about out-of-date hardware, he said. Nowadays, many kernel developers are employed by IT companies, such as hardware manufacturers, which can cause problems as they can mainly be motivated by self-interest."

4 of 512 comments (clear)

  1. Let's not forget... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    that the reason IE failed miserably is because the authors eventually STOPPED fixing bugs. We don't want Linux to take the same road, do we?

  2. Re:Important for the Old Debate by jhylkema · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Be warned though, you're up for some truly hilarious reading, including that Microsoft invented the modern computer, the Internet and the World Wide Web. :)

    This woman is a jingoistic moron. From her site:

    : FOR GOD, FREEDOM AND GEORGE W. BUSH - ONE NATION UNDER GOD : : U - S - A : (Love it or Leave it!)

    Like most things that are worth owning, Computers are an American invention. Look at any modern computer and you will see that the whole thing is the product of American brilliance.

    I wonder if she knows that American cars suck shit compared to the Japanese ones, for starters.

  3. hmm... back to 2.4 by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Better take 2.6 as it is and put it in a code museum as a good example of a dead end project, then commence with some late 2.5 release. It started out all wrong, with far too much new crap going into this supposedly stable branch.

    Still, our servers seem to work fine with it, so far.

    --
    "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
  4. Re:Important for the Old Debate by kamochan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Linux got me using *NIX. BSD showed me how *NIX is meant to work. I currently use OpenBSD and FreeBSD, and this is exactly the kind of reason why I switched.

    Hear, hear. It's exactly the same with me (although [FreeBSD, NetBSD, OSX] is my triplet of choice). "Stable linux" is a myth, as far as my experience goes. The *BSD release engineering and development process is just so much better -- at least if you use your systems for real production use. (Yes, this will spark n+1 fanboi rants, but it doesn't make it less true.)

    Until there is a some kind of successful concentrated engineering effort to maintain a stable and reviewed base system (or even kernel, if distro teams handle the rest), linux remains an amateur quality tool.