[CVALE] Linux Kernel Developer Quit

[Pandora]

Landon Blake wrote:
> http://www.nuxified.org/article/fork_a_kernel_kill_an_os_and_revolutioni
> ze_the_desktop

fixed ->
http://www.nuxified.org/article/fork_a_kernel_kill_an_os_and_revolutionize_the_desktop

> Any thoughts on the recent exit of a kernel developer?

Eh. More room for me! Doesn't seem a good reason to fork though. 
Desktops and servers are both very similar in function, and I don't 
really think it's a good idea to encourage strong separation between the 
two, because then you end up with a few elite servers making a mint off 
their embedded advertising, and everyone else is a desktop user, unable 
or unwilling to fight past the barrier you have created to become 
servers themselves. Why can't we all just be peers?

My complaint about the Linux kernel is, it needs to be more modular. I 
find it terribly ironic that they added very good support for 3rd party 
modules into the kernel, but then they still package 99% of those 
modules in the kernel source distribution. Why bother modularizing then? 
We should be able to move all the modules for all the hardware out of 
the kernel, and have it still compile, then have all those modules 
compile from outside of the kernel source tree, and still be able to run 
a working system. Imagine how small the kernel would be, without any 
hardware support!

Also kernel patches really annoy me. Reiserfs should have been a 
standalone module, but instead it requires you run a patch that modifies 
your kernel sources any way it wants. That's not good modular design in 
my opinion. Plus it's damned hard to upgrade, since the strong coupling 
means when kernel developers change a file that has little to do with 
reiserfs, it breaks the patch which modifies that file. 
Documentation/Changes, anyone?


I agree with this guy:
http://www.nuxified.org/article/fork_a_kernel_kill_an_os_and_revolutionize_the_desktop#comment-9699