Re: New dev model (was [PATCH] delete devfs)

From: Adrian Bunk (bunk_at_fs.tum.de)
Date: 07/25/04

  • Next message: Gene Heskett: "Re: 2.6.8-rc2 crash(s)?"
    Date:	Sun, 25 Jul 2004 15:30:57 +0200
    To: Timothy Miller <miller@techsource.com>
    
    

    On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 04:57:35PM -0400, Timothy Miller wrote:
    >
    > Andrew Morton wrote:
    > >Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de> wrote:
    > >
    > >>my personal opinon is that this new development model isn't a good
    > >>idea from the point of view of users:
    > >>
    > >>There's much worth in having a very stable kernel. Many people use for
    > >>different reasons self-compiled ftp.kernel.org kernels.
    > >
    > >
    > >Well. We'll see. 2.6 is becoming stabler, despite the fact that we're
    > >adding features.
    > >
    > >I wouldn't be averse to releasing a 2.6.20.1 which is purely stability
    > >fixes against 2.6.20 if there is demand for it. Anyone who really cares
    > >about stability of kernel.org kernels won't be deploying 2.6.20 within a
    > >few weeks of its release anyway, so by the time they doodle over to
    > >kernel.org they'll find 2.6.20.2 or whatever.
    >
    >
    > So instead of even minor numbers indicating stability, you have pushed
    > two levels down so that higher sub-revision (minorminorminor?) numbers
    > indicate increased levels of stability?
    >
    > Kinda makes sense.
    >
    > Does that mean that 2.6.21 and 2.6.20.1 are two separate forks of
    > 2.6.20, one for development, and the other for stability?
    >
    > How is this fundamentally different from how it was done before with
    > odd/even minor numbers?
    >...

    Kernel 2.4 continues to be actively supported for several years after
    the release of kernel 2.6 .

    How long do you assume will kernel 2.6.20 be supported after the release
    of kernel 2.6.21?

    cu
    Adrian

    -- 
           "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
            of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
           "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                           Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
    

  • Next message: Gene Heskett: "Re: 2.6.8-rc2 crash(s)?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Bloat report 2.6.3 -> 2.6.4
      ... For the average computer you can buy at your supermarket today it isn't ... People who need to care about the size of the kernel use hand-tuned ... There had been need of rain for many days. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: ANNOUNCE: CE Linux Forum - Specification V1.0 draft
      ... Kernel SHALL be configuralble with compiler size options, ... "specification" didn't send a patch - the trivial patch was sent by ... There had been need of rain for many days. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [Ocfs2-devel] Re: [RFC] [PATCH] OCFS2
      ... > It's a generic mechanism for userspace driven configuration of kernel ... > subsystems/projects could use it too, ... There had been need of rain for many days. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Weirdness with suspending jobs in 2.6.9-rc3
      ... >> It doesn't depend on which version I'm compiling, ... >> kernel I'm actually running. ... There had been need of rain for many days. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [2.6 patch] add a config option for -Os compilation
      ... kernel with some supported compilers) ... there might be fast path code somewhere in the kernel that becomes ... There had been need of rain for many days. ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)