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

Re: F8 kernel-

On Monday 10 March 2008 06:24:44 Andrew Farris wrote:
> I don't know, thats why I said 'if'.  It seems to me that most of the users
> who posted here about the issue knew beforehand, or at least the tone of
> their emails suggests that.

Actually, it is usually pretty difficult for me to figure out if an update 
will break something.  For example, suspend seems to be eternally listed 
as "working," but several kernel updates have broken it.  Suspend to disk is 
also listed as "working," but I have yet to actually observe this (I am told 
it is my graphics driver that is to blame; this is not documented, or wasn't 
the last time I checked).

It is also unreasonable to expect everyone to know everything about every 
package on their system.  My inbox is crowded with messages from ~3 active 
mailing lists; imagine if I tried to keep up with messages from the mailing 
lists for all of the software that I need working (~12 packages).  It would 
be pandemonium.  That's why we trust package maintainers to maintain our 
packages for us; that's also why we get unhappy when packages start 
regressing, and why we have updates-testing for packages that might break 
something or regress something, to help weed out bugs.

My point is, putting a kernel with obvious and known problems into the 
non-testing updates may not be a wise idea.  I understand that we are 
supposed to be bleeding edge, but that shouldn't require us to bleed (much).

-- Benjamin Kreuter

Message sent on: Mon Mar 10 09:51:02 EDT 2008

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

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