Re: kernel pre-emption and software speech

[Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>]

Hi,

Michael Whapples, le Wed 04 Oct 2006 22:47:11 +0100, a écrit :
> In some cases we have to accept less than perfect code. By this I mean that 
> it may function correctly with out no problems, but may need tidying up and 
> other techniques may be more effecient, but if it is the only software that 
> offers those functions then you should accept for what it gives, unless you 
> are prepared to sort it out. Just leaving it definitely doesn't resolve the 
> issues.

I'm sorry, but that's not how things work with Linux. The Reiser4 code
has been waiting for a long time for instance, and won't be merged
unless the required cleaning up happens.

> The other thing is that speakup seems to be good enough for some distros to 
> include speakup in the default kernel and some others have it as an 
> optional kernel but still in the main distro, and are they less stable than 
> others? (these include slackware, gentoo, grml). I always found it strange 
> that Redhat said how good speakup is, but never had it included on the main 
> distro media.

The problem is not a stability problem, but a code correctness / style
/ ... You may have code that works, but if it is unmaintainable, some
day it won't work any more.

Samuel