Re: 2.6.14.5 to 2.6.15 patch

["Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@xenotime.net>]

On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Nick Warne wrote:

> On Wednesday 04 January 2006 22:01, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > > > > Nick's right, both are provided automatically by kernel.org.
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, I started from scratch - 2.6.14, patched to 2.6.15 and then
> > > > make oldconfig etc.
> > > >
> > > > I think there needs to be a way out of this that is easily discernible
> > > > - it does get confusing sometimes with all the patches flying around on
> > > > a 'stable release'.
> > >
> > > It's documented in the kernel.
> > >
> > > There's something in the kernel.org FAQ there about -rc kernels, but it
> > > might be better to generalise this for stable releases. Added hpa to CC.
> >
> > What do you mean, "generalize" this?  Where else could we document it
> > better?
>
> The issue I hit was we have a 'latest stable kernel release 2.6.14.5' and
> under it a 'the latest stable kernel' (or words to that effect) on
> kernel.org.
>
> Then when 2.6.15 came out, that was it!  No patch for the 'latest stable
> kernel release 2.6.14.5'.  It was GONE!

Yes, I brought this up a couple of weeks ago, but I was told
that I was wrong (in some such words).
I agree that it needs to be fixed.

> OK, I suppose we are all capable of getting back to where we are on rebuilding
> to latest 'stable', but there _is_ a missing link for somebody that doesn't
> know - and I think backtracking patches isn't really the way to go if the
> 'latest stable release' isn't catered for.

-- 
~Randy
-
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/