On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 14:01 +0930, David Newall wrote: <snip>this is kindof bullshit, You can never be sure that something works perfectly for everyone, if there were to be so excessive testing that you would be willing to make such a bold claim, any "stable" kernel would be years in testing.. Linux stability also seems to be okay, and people who wants to lower risk of problems can simply choose to use slightly older versions. What i find more of a problem is long term effects and problems of changes. For instance, Linux has slowly and steadily been getting alot more sensitive to IO, and ALOT more memory hungry.. I Recently found a system with a 2.6.4 kernel, and when i upgraded to 2.6.23, i saw memory usage increase from ~250mb to around 500. I upgraded to .25 to see if it was some weird bug, but it is the same. Unfortunately i cannot investigate more, as i only had the box for a very short time, but this is alot more concerning to me. Unfortunately i dont think i can easily reproduce this as i am unsure how to actually get to test 2.6.0 through .24 easily.. Well.. its doing a quite nice job on my new workstation :) <snip> --
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| David Woodhouse | [PATCH 1/3] firmware: allow firmware files to be built into kernel image |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.21 |
| Parag Warudkar | BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 15s! [swapper:0] |
git: | |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Rick Jones | Re: Network latency regressions from 2.6.22 to 2.6.29 |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 18/37] dccp: Support for Mandatory options |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
