# Planning to launch new sources: karlmarx-sources

## petrjanda

I'm planning to launch my own sources, they will be called "karlmarx-sources" and will utlize some patches included in mm and love, plus karlmarx patchset, which may include my patches or patches you send me.  Will start probably with kernel 2.6.2 or 2.6.3, not earlier, because right now i am rather busy.

Update:

--------Primary Objectives---------------------------------------------------

a) Create more a stable 2.6.x kernel line(for desktops) than vanilla-sources.

b) Keep it up to date with latest updates, discerning, without reducing stability.

--------Secondary Objectives------------------------------------------------

c) Improve responsiveness & speed without reducing stability

d) Creating a website, where you may lodge bugs, update patches so I can include them in the kernel for testing purposes.Last edited by petrjanda on Tue Jan 20, 2004 6:34 am; edited 4 times in total

----------

## steel300

What is the purpose of your new kernel source? Is it optimized for a specific architecture? Is it better for desktop use? What do you plan to put into it to make it more useful? Perhaps a bit more info would be in order.

----------

## RevolutionaryIconoclast

IN SOVIET RUSSIA KERNEL INSTALLS YOU.

Sorry,  I had to say it.

----------

## petrjanda

 *steel300 wrote:*   

> What is the purpose of your new kernel source? Is it optimized for a specific architecture? Is it better for desktop use? What do you plan to put into it to make it more useful? Perhaps a bit more info would be in order.

 

Optimized for x86 arch, and to make either a) the fastest "desktop" kernel, without reducing stability or b) more stable server(desktop if you want to have more stable 2.6 desktop, ) kernel, without reducing speed, but that would mean mm & love sources would not be included, because they are rather "on edge". Haven't really started much planning yet, as i said i am rather busy doing other stuff now, but i will jump into it as soon as i can.

It will be rather more interesting if I get the AMD64, but thats not gonna happy anytime soon.

----------

## jcc

so the only thing you know is that you'll be doing your patchset... best desktop or best server? who cares?? :)

----------

## petrjanda

 *jcc wrote:*   

> so the only thing you know is that you'll be doing your patchset... best desktop or best server? who cares?? 

 

I'll probably stick to making a more stable desktop kernel, without reducing responsiveness(or maybe even improving, but that won't be the main goal) & speed in general, afterall that was one of goals of Karl Marx too, to create a "hard stable" yet not "unresponsive" society. I'll probably leave from my earlier intention to include both love and mm, i might or might not pick some of their patches though.

Have I explained it better now   :Razz: 

----------

## Cerement

Linux users worry about too many distros to choose from ...

Gentoo users worry about too many -sources to choose from ...

Good luck, either way!

(karlmarx-sources -- patched to remove references to master/slave relationships?   :Twisted Evil:  )

----------

## petrjanda

Ok, here is summery of my plan(ordered by importance):

--------Primary Objectives---------------------------------------------------

a) Create more a stable 2.6.x kernel line(for desktops) than vanilla-sources.

b) Keep it up to date with latest updates, discerning, without reducing stability.

--------Secondary Objectives------------------------------------------------

c) Improve responsiveness & speed without reducing stability

d) Creating a website, where you may lodge bugs, update patches so I can include them in the kernel for testing purposes.

----------

## Jake

If you leave out the -mm patchset for stability and include -love stuff like rieser4, cfq, runtime-selectable IO scheduler, and VM swappiness, you can count me in.

----------

## petrjanda

 *Jake wrote:*   

> If you leave out the -mm patchset for stability and include -love stuff like rieser4, cfq, runtime-selectable IO scheduler, and VM swappiness, you can count me in.

 

I've heard some good things about reiser4 being quite stable already, so i might include it under Hazardous(considering its not a critical feature that people will want to use in stable kernel), about the other's, i haven't tried on my own yet, i will post more threads for people that tested them to tell their results, and then i will decide if it can be included as Hazardous. Important thing with this kernel line will be as stated before: more stability, same (or even better) performance.

----------

## tdb

 *petrjanda wrote:*   

>  afterall that was one of goals of Karl Marx too, to create a "hard stable" yet not "unresponsive" society. 

 

Yeah, but Marx failed.

----------

## pixie

 *Quote:*   

> Yeah, but Marx failed.

 

Marxism was failed by the same thing every political and social philosophy is failed by.

People.

Capitalism/consumerism works fine our end (UK/USA/Etc) up to a point but go to other countries and see how if affects some people. Like the children working in sweatshops making Nike trainers for 10c an hour for instance.

Western capitalist democracy fails people too. We just don't have to look at them.

----------

## tdb

 *pixie wrote:*   

>  *Quote:*   Yeah, but Marx failed. 
> 
> Marxism was failed by the same thing every political and social philosophy is failed by.
> 
> People.
> ...

 

Then what's the point in having a poltitical system if it doesnt' work on the one thing it's meant for, people. I personally don't  think capitalism is a failure at all. The kids sweating away in Indochina making cross trainers are stuck there because their aren't any other better-paying jobs. The lack of jobs is probably because they don't have a free government or free markets. Capitalism isn't a designed system like Marxism is. It doesn't have to be planned out, written down, and forced upon people. It is what naturally happens when people are free. Besides, to quantify their wages in our dollars is a fallacy. Who knows, ten cents a day may be a lot of money.

But this is getting off topic.

----------

## pixie

I think child labour at any wage is rather unethical.

The things is.... we have one set of rules for our own countries and another entirely for others. This is where capitalism fails people.

These countries are subjected to the will of others because others industrialised first.

They don't stop child labour/exploitation because if they do they will lose what little economy they actually have.

Personally I think capitalism democracy is the best option. But in drastic need of a more ethical set of rules. I think a company should not be able to exploit foreign labour in this way. If a UK or US based company wants something manufactured it should be under the same terms/conditions it considers as right for it's own workers.

----------

## Kihaji

 *petrjanda wrote:*   

> Ok, here is summery of my plan(ordered by importance):
> 
> --------Primary Objectives---------------------------------------------------
> 
> a) Create more a stable 2.6.x kernel line(for desktops) than vanilla-sources.

 

Whats "more stable"? What do you plan on focusing on/fixing to improve stability?

----------

## KK_r

Marx didn't fail because he didn't try to do anything, he only said what was going to happend

----------

## tdb

 *KK_r wrote:*   

> Marx didn't fail because he didn't try to do anything, he only said what was going to happend

 

Marx also said the Revlolution is at hand.  Now I don't know about you, but 146 years is not exactly "at hand" in my book.

----------

## supernovus

And what will karlmarx-sources offer that love-sources or gentoo-dev-sources don't?

I guess what I'm asking is, what is the advantage of making yet another kernel source tree rather than maybe working with Steel on the love-sources?

Or is it to have yet "just another option" ? 

I'm not saying to not do it, but define what will make it different.

 :Smile: 

----------

## KK_r

 *tdb wrote:*   

>  *KK_r wrote:*   Marx didn't fail because he didn't try to do anything, he only said what was going to happend 
> 
> Marx also said the Revlolution is at hand.  Now I don't know about you, but 146 years is not exactly "at hand" in my book.

 

Well a couple of hundred years is quite fast to build a complete equal society. Maybe he just forgot a zero in the end in his calculations.

----------

## petrjanda

 *supernovus wrote:*   

> And what will karlmarx-sources offer that love-sources or gentoo-dev-sources don't?
> 
> I guess what I'm asking is, what is the advantage of making yet another kernel source tree rather than maybe working with Steel on the love-sources?
> 
> Or is it to have yet "just another option" ? 
> ...

 

well, i said before i want to create a kernel line that will not be focused on exploring and inserting unstable code, like love and mm, but rather focused to make the current vanilla kernel more stable.

----------

## petrjanda

 *Kihaji wrote:*   

>  *petrjanda wrote:*   Ok, here is summery of my plan(ordered by importance):
> 
> --------Primary Objectives---------------------------------------------------
> 
> a) Create more a stable 2.6.x kernel line(for desktops) than vanilla-sources. 
> ...

 

I will be gathering information from people who use vanilla 2.6.x where they get errors and i will be trying to fix it up.

----------

## supernovus

 *petrjanda wrote:*   

> 
> 
> well, i said before i want to create a kernel line that will not be focused on exploring and inserting unstable code, like love and mm, but rather focused to make the current vanilla kernel more stable.

 

Okay, that makes sense. I'd take a look at the gentoo-dev-sources as a starting point, as they seem to be focusing on mostly stable stuff for that one. Good luck with the sources by the way, I hope I didn't come off as sounding like I was complaining, I was just wondering what the 'difference' would be.  More choice is always a Good Thing (TM).

I'll refrain from the joke I was going to make about making an aynrand-sources suppliment  :Wink: 

----------

## petrjanda

 *supernovus wrote:*   

>  *petrjanda wrote:*   
> 
> well, i said before i want to create a kernel line that will not be focused on exploring and inserting unstable code, like love and mm, but rather focused to make the current vanilla kernel more stable. 
> 
> Okay, that makes sense. I'd take a look at the gentoo-dev-sources as a starting point, as they seem to be focusing on mostly stable stuff for that one. Good luck with the sources by the way, I hope I didn't come off as sounding like I was complaining, I was just wondering what the 'difference' would be.  More choice is always a Good Thing (TM).
> ...

 

Hey thats okey  :Wink:  I knew you weren't complaining.. well when i start working on it, I'll let you people know.

----------

