10 Mar
2005
10 Mar
'05
7:10 p.m.
On Thursday 10 March 2005 09:13, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
it?
Maybe the Linux kernel can be considered as a "good dictatorship"
according to
the way it is managed. However I think it is a quite different
"dictatorship" than Microsoft's: do you think the developpers of the
Linux kernel could force down our throat something like the project
"Palladium"? I bet there would be a fork
before the end of the day it is announced :-P
___[ Pub ]____________________________________________________________
Envie de discuter gratuitement avec vos amis ?
Téléchargez Yahoo! Messenger http://yahoo.ifrance.com
Patrick Kaell wrote:
> Until now, it may not have been a big problem, if you didn't need a
> current and stable system at the same time. But now the slow release
> schedule may introduce a severe problem. Sarge uses DEVFS, a system
> which has created some problems on the driver level, created race
> issues, is not maintained anymore and may even be removed from the
main
> kernel tree by mid 2005 according to Linus
Torvalds. A switch to
udev is
> out of question according to some Debian
developers as this switch
would
> delay the release of Sarge by additional 2 years.
So Sarge will
stick to
> DEVFS, which means a considerable load increase
to the Debian
security
team, which
will have to maintain DEVFS themselves and will have to
backport security fixes to obsolete software packages.
I wasn't specifially criticising Debian, but mentionning it as a
counter-example of an efficient process.
The Linux kernel is another good example of 'good dictatorship', isn't