Re: A newbie's view

[Seth Vidal <skvidal@new-era.com>]

> 
> OK, I've just been looking in precisely the wrong place; I tend to read about
> Linux development on linux.dev.kernel, where (unsurprisingly) everybody's
> building everything from source, and then assumed that *everybody* had to build
> everything from source. All the people around college talk about frequently
> recompiling the kernel; it's just that all the people around college are keeping
> up with the point releases ...
ahh. Well if you're a bleeding-edge sort of guy (and who isn't on their
"experimental systems") 
I'm a 2.0.36's on all of the systems I administer.
I know it's boring. But boring is so relaxing.

 
> From some vague remarks on l.d.k, I read that modules for kernel 2.2.foo would
> tend not to work with 2.2.bar; this isn't a *problem*, but sounds as if the sort
> of fine-grained incremental updating that would seem ideal is impractical.
not entirely.

For every new stable point release (2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3)
a distribution maintainer (most of them) will build a new generic
architecture dependent package and a set of modules.
They'll dump the package on the net and wa-la you're up on the newer
kernels.
Maybe its a week later but big deal.

> This is much nicer than I'd expected.
good. thats the way it should be.
always nicer than expected.

-sv

-
Linux-future: thinking about the future of the Linux kernel
http://humbolt.nl.linux.org/lists/