[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Kernel Modules in Fedora -x



Les Mikesell wrote:
> I thought RHEL made some effort to avoid breaking the 3rd party
> modules that their customers rely on with every kernel update (and
> that's probably a very large reason they have customers...) while
> Linus and fedora refuse to provide a stable interface.

The goal of Fedora is to be as close to upstream as possible - not to
have more customers^Wusers or win popularity contests.

RHEL has customers -- customers who pay good money so that Red Hat can
pay developers to spend time backporting things to maintain ABI.

Fedora has users -- users who get a very current open source OS at no
cost.

If you really need what RHEL provides, use RHEL or CentOS.  Why should
Fedora duplicate that?

>> One "bright" idea was to let Fedora come up with a way to make it
>> better.
>
> You mean - like actually define an interface and stick to it at
> least through a kernel major revision number?

Right, and have davej and the kernel team spend all of their time
backporting?  I'd rather have the kernel updated in a timely manner.
The place to argue for a stable interface is upstream.  Hasn't this
been said over and over before?

-- 
Todd        OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Start every day with a smile and get it over with.
    -- W.C. Fields

Attachment: pgpEh1cP5GxPT.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]