Re: LDD3 examples advice

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 08:38:50AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Greg KH wrote:
> 
> > ... LDD3 is one of the top selling Linux books for the publisher.
> > It's a matter of time and figuring out the best way to produce the
> > next volume of the book in a manner that is not going to cause it to
> > go instantly out of date like the previous version did.
> >
> > Just publishing a new version in dead-tree form would not make much
> > sense anymore as the rate of change in the kernel is increasing so
> > fast that it doesn't make any sense.
> 
>   at the risk of saying something idiotic, why *should* LDD4 be out of
> date almost the instant it hits the shelves?  if the underlying kernel
> code is really changing that quickly to olsolete the book, that
> strikes me as a *really* bad sign of kernel instability.

Sorry, but have you read Documentation/stable_api_nonsense.txt before?

If not, please do so, it will answer this question for you.

Also note, the rate of change for the kernel has _increased_
dramatically over the past few years, so that anything that is written
down goes out of date faster than it used to in the past.  That's just a
side affect (or is it effect?) of our rapid development model.

>   note:  i'm not talking about the obvious *new* features that are
> being added constantly to the kernel.  obviously, that's going to
> happen.  but is it really true that you can't even write a book on
> *basic* kernel device drivers without seeing it out of date that
> quickly?  i thought the whole point of the kernel API was that it
> remain relatively stable for *developers*, regardless of what might
> happen internally.

No, not at all, please read the above file for why.

>   anyone should be able to see that a published book on device drivers
> will probably become *incomplete* fairly quickly.  but is that really
> the same as saying that it's going to become *wrong*?

If you consider examples that do not build anymore due to compiler
warnings and errors "wrong", then yes, that is the case.

thanks,

greg k-h

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with
"unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ


[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [Linux Kernel Mentors]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [IETF Annouce]     [Git]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ACPI]
  Powered by Linux