kernel pre-emption and software speech

[Michael Whapples]

In some cases we have to accept less than perfect code. By this I mean that 
it may function correctly with out no problems, but may need tidying up and 
other techniques may be more effecient, but if it is the only software that 
offers those functions then you should accept for what it gives, unless you 
are prepared to sort it out. Just leaving it definitely doesn't resolve the 
issues.

The other thing is that speakup seems to be good enough for some distros to 
include speakup in the default kernel and some others have it as an 
optional kernel but still in the main distro, and are they less stable than 
others? (these include slackware, gentoo, grml). I always found it strange 
that Redhat said how good speakup is, but never had it included on the main 
distro media.

From
Michael Whapples

 Samuel Thibault writes:

> Hi,
> 
> Justin Ekis, le Wed 04 Oct 2006 10:39:41 -0400, a écrit :
>> Considering all that, and the fact that speakup seems to be very
>> stable, I think this message is overly harsh but I'm pasting it below
>> anyway.
> 
> Mmm, it is not.  Really.  "Working" code doesn't mean "acceptable"
> code.  Linux can't accept code which doesn't follow a certain guideline.
> Adrian Bunk was kind enough to enumerate the issues to be resolved, and
> I do agree on all of them.  This is not being harsh, this is requiring
> good code quality.  Else Linux wouldn't be so successful.
> 
> Samuel
> 
> 
>