Re:Linux Eliminates the Strncpy API After Six Years of Work,...
by qarl on Sunday June 21, 2026 @12:19AM
(#48615641)
Right.
And what I'm saying is I refuse to believe the Linux kernel approval procedures are that inefficient. Therefore, your belief "bottleneck was most likely not mechanical code changes" is most likely incorrect.
It would be interesting to get the actual answer to this question.
EDIT: Substantially changing your argument after posting isn't nice. But to answer your charge - no - I never made that claim.
Re:Linux Eliminates the Strncpy API After Six Years of Work,...
by qustio on Sunday June 21, 2026 @01:03AM
(#48615841)
Sorry, I didn't feel like this thread needed to be dragged out any longer since it's going in circles at this point and expanded my comment, but I didn't realize you had already replied.
Re:Linux Eliminates the Strncpy API After Six Years of Work,...
by qarl on Sunday June 21, 2026 @01:38AM
(#48615983)
Well - not really a circle. I keep saying the same thing over and over and you keep throwing arguments at it, unsuccessfully.
Re:Linux Eliminates the Strncpy API After Six Years of Work,...
by NetMageSCW on Sunday June 21, 2026 @02:44AM
(#48616277)
I don’t think it’s the arguments that are unsuccessful.
Not that the Linux kernel approval procedures couldn't be streamlined, work couldn't be parallelized, or anything else like that, which would be a different discussion entirely.