Linux 3.2 Kernel May Be Of A Worrying Size

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Linux 3.2 Kernel May Be Of A Worrying Size

After going through ten release candidates, the Linux 3.1 kernel should be released by early next week. However, with the Linux 3.1 kernel release cycle having been dragged on by more RCs than normal and the Kernel.org hacking incident, the Linux 3.2 kernel may end up being abnormally large and its worrying Linus Torvalds...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTAwNDc

[Kelimion]

For those who want to follow the discussion as it develops, here's the thread on lkml.org.

[octavsly]

linux-next is pretty large, but I don't track historical sizes all that well, so I can't say if it's noticeably larger than it usually is.

therefore I think the title is misleading. Linus refers to the larger dev time combined with the loss of productivity due to k.org issues.

[zoomblab]

Linux releases depend on Linus himself. What will happen when he leave this world?

[AnonymousCoward]

Then we have to find out how to zombify him, fast, else Linux is lost, and will be forgotten, and hordes of Mac and Windows users will take over the world.

[smitty3268]

Linux releases depend on Linus himself. What will happen when he leave this world?

Someone else will take over.

Seriously, the only reason Linux releases depend on him is that most of the different players involved in the kernel have agreed to it. Google is one that hasn't, and they have their own kernel they release on their own schedule.

If Linus retires, all the various distros and companies will agree on someone else to take over his job, and things will continue on as they always have.

Or, of course, you can choose to believe the opposite - that Linus is the only thing holding all these various groups together, and that Linux will fragment into a thousand different fiefdoms after he's gone just like BSD. But that doesn't make much sense to me.

[barkas]

Bag of rice may fall over in china in the near future.

[AnonymousCoward]

Or, of course, you can choose to believe the opposite - that Linus is the only thing holding all these various groups together, and that Linux will fragment into a thousand different fiefdoms after he's gone just like BSD. But that doesn't make much sense to me.

Well, BSD has an egoistic license ("I want to use the code for whatever I want!"), Linux is more social ("share the code the same way you got it"), which presumably represents the mindset of its contributors. So BSD fragments, Linux stays unified. No problems.

[deanjo]

Well, BSD has an egoistic license ("I want to use the code for whatever I want!"),

You have that completely backwards. Since it is the person who develops the code that decides the license it's more "Feel free to use my code however you want no matter who you are." which is hardly egotistical.

[AnonymousCoward]

I've seen much more people complain about code being GPL than BSD, the reason being "why don't you let me use your code? Don't you want your software to be free?"