Happy New Year! Forget all that stuff about the Mayan Calendar. Be Cool!

Latest Reviews & Tutorials

  • How to customize Linux Mint 12 KDE
  • Linux Mint 12 KDE review
  • GhostBSD 2.5 review
  • How to install Takeoff Launcher on Fedora 16 KDE
  • Install Quick Access on Linux Mint 12 KDE or any KDE installation
  • How to install Linux Mint 12 KDE on a btrfs file system
  • Manual disk partitioning guide for Linux Mint 12 KDE
  • How to compile and install Takeoff Launcher on Linux Mint 12 KDE
  • 3 must-have extensions for Fedora 16 and other GNOME 3 installations
  • How to install Razor-qt on Linux Mint 12 KDE
  • How to enable desktop slideshow on Linux Mint 12 KDE
  • KahelOS 111111 review
  • How to install Cinnamon in Ubuntu 11.10
  • How to customize Cinnamon on Fedora 16 and Linux Mint 12
  • How to install Cinnamon on Fedora 16
  • What does Cinnamon bring to the desktop?
  • How to access Microsoft Windows files and folders from Linux
  • How to dual-boot Pear OS Panther 3 and Windows 7
  • How to dual-boot Chakra Linux Edn and Windows 7, part 1
  • Linpus Lite Desktop 1.6 review

Built to last


TuxIt has now been almost exactly five years since kernel development community tentatively started using the git source code management system with the 2.6.12-rc2 commit. That was an uncertain time; nobody really knew how long it would take the development process to get back up to speed after an abrupt core-tool change. As it turned out, git was almost immediately useful, and has only become more so since. Making the development process work is git’s main claim to fame, but, as a side benefit, git also makes it possible to learn a lot about how our kernel is developed. And that, as it turns out, includes taking a look at the code which is not changed.

The speed of the development process is impressive; the nearly-released 2.6.33 kernel is the product of nearly 11,000 individual changes affecting nearly a million lines of code (look here for more 2.6.33 statistics). Those numbers are boringly normal for a three-month development cycle; things are always moving that fast.

Given that, one might think that, by now, very little of that 2.6.12-rc2 kernel which was first committed to git would remain. After all, over 500,000 lines were deleted in this development cycle alone. I got curious, and decided to look a bit deeper. The result was the creation of some brutally hackish Python scripts, the expenditure of about a week of solid CPU time, and some statistics on the age of the kernel code base. Continue reading.

0saves
To have articles like this delivered automatically to your Feed Reader or Inbox, subscribe via RSS or email. For simple comments, use the commenting system, but for more involved assistance, please use the Question & Answer section.

Posts From The Same Category:




Questions & Answers Hola! Looking for an answer to a question but did not find it? Then surf on over to the Questions & Answers section. It's a brand new addition to our site, and we are waiting just to answer your question(s).

Leave a Reply

Trackbacks

Read previous post:
Why I Will Not Sign the Public Domain Manifesto
Open letter to Google: free VP8, and use it on YouTube
The Toyota recall and the case for open, auditable source code
Close