On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 07:46:55 -0500, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > In the old scheme with an odd-numbered branch for experiments, 2.2 and > 2.4 became very stable at around X.X.20. I don't see that happening > with 2.6. People are patching 2.6.x versions. In particular 2.6.16 got a lot of attention, though I don't know if the person responsible for that branch is still actively doing it. It was sort of an experiment, but I don't think there have been a lot of people sticking with 2.6.16. > > Yes, with 2.6, older doesn't mean better, just different. But where are > your security updates? Depending on how the box is being used he may not need them.
