Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 6th May 2006 17:26 UTC, submitted by JMcCarthy
Linux Andrew Morton, the lead maintainer of the Linux production kernel, is worried that an increasing number of defects are appearing in the 2.6 kernel and is considering drastic action to resolve it. "I believe the 2.6 kernel is slowly getting buggier. It seems we're adding bugs at a higher rate than we're fixing them," Morton said, in a talk at the LinuxTag conference in Wiesbaden, Germany, on Friday.
Thread beginning with comment 121772
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by deathshadow on Sun 7th May 2006 01:26 UTC
Member since:

This part of the article caught my eye:
Morton admitted he hasn't yet proved this statistically, but has noticed that he is getting more emails with bug reports


A> Makes the whole article little more than idle speculation

B> Ignores the possibility that it's as buggy as ever, just that there are more people USING it now reporting bugs. With Distro's like Ubunutu and Linspire opening the gates to 'normal' users a bit wider and a jump in install base, OF COURSE he's gonna get more bug reports.

Of course I really like:
One problem is that few developers are motivated to work on bugs
Because I've been saying that all along about open source in general pretty much since I first heard of the concept. For every problem that the handful of companies actually paying programmers to fix, there are likely dozens of bugs not getting fixed because nobody with the skill to fix it has a REAL incentive to do so.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Hah
by Cloudy on Sun 7th May 2006 02:28 in reply to "Hah"
Cloudy Member since:

Makes the whole article little more than idle speculation

It's speculation, and Morton admits it as such, having assigned himself the action item to dig up the numbers.

But it's not idle speculation. Had I said it, it would be idle, because I'm just a random kernel developer, AFA LKML, but AM is the gateway for code, and lives and breathes stability.

In his case, it's more highly informed speculation.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Hah
by DigitalAxis on Sun 7th May 2006 05:18 in reply to "Hah"
DigitalAxis Member since:

Well, such a claim should be testable.
One, check all the bug reports for 2.6.16 versus the bug reports for, say, 2.6.8 to test to see if there are more reports;
Two, run both kernel codebases through some kind of bug-scanning program (is Coverity a program, or a service?) and see which one has more bugs (I realize the program wouldn't do a perfect job, but it should at least allow for a comparison of numbers of specific types of flaws.)
(Three, fix all those flaws that the scanning tool found)

Reply Parent Score: 1