Greg Kroah puts Canonical contributions in perspective.

[deanjo]

It's been long known that Canonicals contributions to linux has been far and inbetween. Greg Kroah breaks it down into numbers.

http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/lpc_2008_keynote.html

[rbmorse]

I thought the bite on Canonical was that it mostly re-packages Debian and does very little original code for anything. How does that get them into the kernel development business?

Or is GK's arguement that if you write for Linux you have to be a kernel dev, too?

[deanjo]

I thought the bite on Canonical was that it mostly re-packages Debian and does very little original code for anything. How does that get them into the kernel development business?

Or is GK's arguement that if you write for Linux you have to be a kernel dev, too?

I think his gripe is about how Canonical seems to get all the press about how much they have contributed to the linux, when in reality they have done very little to actually forward the development of the linux OS code wise. The same could be said of debian, although they do contribute more then Canonical, their contributions seem to be scarce as well although Greg does point out it is difficult to track Debs contributiions.

As he points out, even nvidia has contributed more then Canonical.

[Kano]

Well many ubuntu patches are for adding extra drivers to the ubuntu folder, you see those added modules simple with this code (8.04 used linux-ubuntu-modules, 7.10 and 8.10 this way)

/sbin/modprobe -l|grep ubuntu

It is unlikely that those patches go upstream although they are usefull. I use a slighly (vesafb enabled) mod of the kernel for my distro. It is nice to have lots of extra modules included and libata for the harddisk - Debian lenny uses CONFIG_IDE still for most drivers.

The other patches are marked as SAUCE when you look there:

http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubunt...git;a=shortlog

Not sure from where they got those from - a few (maybe 10-15) have been from me too, before they went upstream. Maybe some of em have been their creation.

[stevenaaus]

I think his gripe is about how Canonical seems to get all the press about how much they have contributed to the linux, when in reality they have done very little to actually forward the development of the linux OS code wise. The same could be said of debian, although they do contribute more then Canonical, their contributions seem to be scarce as well although Greg does point out it is difficult to track Debs contributiions.

As he points out, even nvidia has contributed more then Canonical.

It was an interesting subject really. GK never came across as having ill feelings for Ubuntu, imho, though that impression was added by news sites reporting the fact.

Though i don't care especially for Ubuntu, the goodwill (?) they have generated for Linux is worth something more than you're average kernel hacker will acknowledge, or even know about. Though kernel contribs are nice too.

[Eragon]

People should stop whining about Ubuntu and conanical

[energyman]

canonical should stop being a parasitic being and start pushing patches and fixes upstream.

[Kano]

Well when you want to have got a kernel patch added then you are more or less forced to push it to upstream instead now. Like that little ALSA patch:

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kerne...4da0b127b6fd8e

I wanted that in U kernel, but to add it I had to send it to somebody else too who added it then even in mainline - pretty fast this time however...