Re: New Linux Development Model

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 

On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 16:03 +0200, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, jerome lacoste wrote:
> Because i like to test new kernels. On 2.4 I run the vanila kernel and a 
> test kernel. When something went wrong on a test kernel was always a 
> stable kernel to use.
> 2.6 looks a lot like 2.5. New features are added very quickly without much 
> testing. Of course there is Andrew's -mm tree but this one sometimes 
> is too broken.
> For me linux looks now like it has one unstable tree (2.6) which is 
> something like -ac was in days of 2.4 and  -mm was in the days of 2.4 
> -2.5 and -mm which looks like it became very unstable.
> This is what i saw ok lkml (maybe my view is distorted).
> I'll stop ranting and try both of them because i have some bugs to report.

Man, -mm are unstable kernels, 2.6.x[.y] are the stable ones.

> The 2.6.x.y kernels sometimes are almost no different from 2.6.x

That's true, and good. the .y is the -stable tree, that is supposed to
add only stability and security fixes.

-- 
Marcos Marado <[email protected]>
Novis ISP

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux